Thomas E Bright, John R Harry, Jason Lake, Peter Mundy, Nicola Theis, Jonathan D Hughes
{"title":"利用手持加重偏心负荷评估反向跳跃的方法考虑因素。","authors":"Thomas E Bright, John R Harry, Jason Lake, Peter Mundy, Nicola Theis, Jonathan D Hughes","doi":"10.1080/14763141.2024.2374884","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study aimed to compare the agreement between three-dimensional motion capture and vertical ground reaction force (vGRF) in identifying the point of dumbbell (DB) release during a countermovement jump with accentuated eccentric loading (CMJ<sub>AEL</sub>), and to examine the influence of the vGRF analysis method on the reliability and magnitude of CMJ<sub>AEL</sub> variables. Twenty participants (10 male, 10 female) completed five maximal effort CMJ<sub>AEL</sub> at 20% and 30% of body mass (CMJ<sub>AEL20</sub> and CMJ<sub>AEL30</sub>, respectively) using DBs. There was large variability between methods in both loading conditions, as indicated by the wide limits of agreement (CMJ<sub>AEL20</sub> = -0.22 to 0.07 s; CMJ<sub>AEL30</sub> = -0.29 to 0.14 s). Variables were calculated from the vGRF data, and compared between four methods (forward integration (FI), backward integration (BI), FI adjusted at bottom position (BP), FI adjusted at DB release point (DR)). Greater absolute reliability was observed for variables from DR (CV% ≤ 7.28) compared to BP (CV% ≤ 13.74), although relative reliability was superior following the BP method (ICC ≥ 0.781 vs ≥ 0.606, respectively). The vGRF method shows promise in pinpointing the DB release point when only force platforms are accessible, and a combination of FI and BI analyses is advised to understand CMJ<sub>AEL</sub> dynamics.</p>","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Methodological considerations in assessing countermovement jumps with handheld accentuated eccentric loading.\",\"authors\":\"Thomas E Bright, John R Harry, Jason Lake, Peter Mundy, Nicola Theis, Jonathan D Hughes\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/14763141.2024.2374884\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>This study aimed to compare the agreement between three-dimensional motion capture and vertical ground reaction force (vGRF) in identifying the point of dumbbell (DB) release during a countermovement jump with accentuated eccentric loading (CMJ<sub>AEL</sub>), and to examine the influence of the vGRF analysis method on the reliability and magnitude of CMJ<sub>AEL</sub> variables. Twenty participants (10 male, 10 female) completed five maximal effort CMJ<sub>AEL</sub> at 20% and 30% of body mass (CMJ<sub>AEL20</sub> and CMJ<sub>AEL30</sub>, respectively) using DBs. There was large variability between methods in both loading conditions, as indicated by the wide limits of agreement (CMJ<sub>AEL20</sub> = -0.22 to 0.07 s; CMJ<sub>AEL30</sub> = -0.29 to 0.14 s). Variables were calculated from the vGRF data, and compared between four methods (forward integration (FI), backward integration (BI), FI adjusted at bottom position (BP), FI adjusted at DB release point (DR)). Greater absolute reliability was observed for variables from DR (CV% ≤ 7.28) compared to BP (CV% ≤ 13.74), although relative reliability was superior following the BP method (ICC ≥ 0.781 vs ≥ 0.606, respectively). The vGRF method shows promise in pinpointing the DB release point when only force platforms are accessible, and a combination of FI and BI analyses is advised to understand CMJ<sub>AEL</sub> dynamics.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":2,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/14763141.2024.2374884\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14763141.2024.2374884","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
本研究旨在比较三维运动捕捉和垂直地面反作用力(vGRF)在识别加重偏心负荷反向运动跳跃(CMJAEL)过程中哑铃(DB)释放点时的一致性,并研究 vGRF 分析方法对 CMJAEL 变量的可靠性和幅度的影响。20 名参与者(男性 10 人,女性 10 人)使用 DBs 完成了 5 次最大努力 CMJAEL,分别为体重的 20% 和 30%(CMJAEL20 和 CMJAEL30)。在这两种负荷条件下,不同方法之间存在很大的差异,这一点可以从广泛的一致性极限(CMJAEL20 = -0.22 到 0.07 秒;CMJAEL30 = -0.29 到 0.14 秒)中看出。根据 vGRF 数据计算变量,并对四种方法(前向积分(FI)、后向积分(BI)、在底部位置调整 FI(BP)、在 DB 释放点调整 FI(DR))进行比较。与 BP(CV% ≤ 13.74)相比,DR(CV% ≤ 7.28)变量的绝对可靠性更高,但 BP 方法的相对可靠性更高(ICC ≥ 0.781 vs ≥ 0.606)。vGRF 方法有望在只有力平台可用时精确定位 DB 释放点,建议结合 FI 和 BI 分析来了解 CMJAEL 动态。
Methodological considerations in assessing countermovement jumps with handheld accentuated eccentric loading.
This study aimed to compare the agreement between three-dimensional motion capture and vertical ground reaction force (vGRF) in identifying the point of dumbbell (DB) release during a countermovement jump with accentuated eccentric loading (CMJAEL), and to examine the influence of the vGRF analysis method on the reliability and magnitude of CMJAEL variables. Twenty participants (10 male, 10 female) completed five maximal effort CMJAEL at 20% and 30% of body mass (CMJAEL20 and CMJAEL30, respectively) using DBs. There was large variability between methods in both loading conditions, as indicated by the wide limits of agreement (CMJAEL20 = -0.22 to 0.07 s; CMJAEL30 = -0.29 to 0.14 s). Variables were calculated from the vGRF data, and compared between four methods (forward integration (FI), backward integration (BI), FI adjusted at bottom position (BP), FI adjusted at DB release point (DR)). Greater absolute reliability was observed for variables from DR (CV% ≤ 7.28) compared to BP (CV% ≤ 13.74), although relative reliability was superior following the BP method (ICC ≥ 0.781 vs ≥ 0.606, respectively). The vGRF method shows promise in pinpointing the DB release point when only force platforms are accessible, and a combination of FI and BI analyses is advised to understand CMJAEL dynamics.