Countermovement Jump Force-Time Curve Analyses: Reliability and Comparability Across Force Plate Systems.
Journal
Journal of strength and conditioning research
ISSN: 1533-4287
Titre abrégé: J Strength Cond Res
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9415084
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 Jan 2024
01 Jan 2024
Historique:
pubmed:
10
10
2023
medline:
10
10
2023
entrez:
10
10
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Merrigan, JJ, Strang, A, Eckerle, J, Mackowski, N, Hierholzer, K, Ray, NT, Smith, R, Hagen, JA, and Briggs, RA. Countermovement jump force-time curve analyses: reliability and comparability across force plate systems. J Strength Cond Res 38(1): 30-37, 2024-Considering the growing prevalence of commercial force plates providing automated force-time analyses, understanding levels of agreement across force plate systems is warranted. Countermovement jump (CMJ) metrics across Vald ForceDecks (FD), Hawkin Dynamics (HD), and Sparta Science (SS) force plate systems were compared. Twenty-two subjects completed CMJ testing (∼128 comparisons) on each force plate system separately with rest between jumps. Baseline testing occurred 3 times and demonstrated poor test-retest reliability for modified reactive strength index (mRSI) and rate of force development (RFD). ForceDecks and HD comparisons yielded acceptable agreement for concentric/propulsive relative force and net impulse, jump height, eccentric/braking RFD, and mRSI, but systematic and proportionate bias existed for RFD. Sparta Science jump height and reactive strength index (RSI) demonstrated systematic overestimations compared with HD and FD, but jump height had acceptable agreement according to concordance correlation coefficients (CCC = 0.92-0.95). Agreement between SS load (eccentric RFD) and HD braking RFD was acceptable (CCC = 0.91), whereas agreement between SS load and FD deceleration RFD was considered acceptable (CCC = 0.81-0.87) but demonstrated systematic and proportionate bias. ForceDecks (CCC = 0.89) and HD (CCC = 0.85) average relative concentric/propulsive force yielded acceptable agreement with SS explode (average relative concentric force), but SS explode demonstrated systematically lower values than FD and HD. Sparta Science drive (concentric impulse) yielded acceptable agreement with HD relative propulsive impulse (CCC = 0.85), but not FD concentric impulse. Human performance practitioners need to be aware of inconsistencies among testing procedures and analyses across force plate systems, such as differences in metric definitions and units of measurement, before making comparisons across systems.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37815253
doi: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000004586
pii: 00124278-990000000-00316
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
30-37Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2023 National Strength and Conditioning Association.
Références
Beckham G, Suchomel T, Mizuguchi S. Force plate use in performance monitoring and sport science testing. New Stud Athl 29: 25–37, 2014.
Bird MB, Koltun KJ, Mi Q, et al. Predictive utility of commercial grade technologies for assessing musculoskeletal injury risk in US Marine Corps Officer candidates. Front Physiol 14: 1088813, 2023.
Bird MB, Mi Q, Koltun KJ, et al. Unsupervised clustering techniques identify movement strategies in the countermovement jump associated with musculoskeletal injury risk during US Marine Corps Officer Candidates School. Front Physiol 13: 868002, 2022.
Brady CJ, Harrison AJ, Comyns TM. A review of the reliability of biomechanical variables produced during the isometric mid-thigh pull and isometric squat and the reporting of normative data. Sports Biomech 19: 1–25, 2020.
Buckner SL, Jessee MB, Mattocks KT, et al. Determining strength: A case for multiple methods of measurement. Sports Med 47: 193–195, 2017.
Comfort P, Dos'Santos T, Beckham GK, Stone MH, Guppy SN, Haff GG. Standardization and methodological considerations for the isometric midthigh pull. Strength Cond J 41: 57–79, 2019.
Cormack SJ, Newton RU, McGuigan MR, Doyle TLA. Reliability of measures obtained during single and repeated countermovement jumps. Int J Sports Physiol Perform 3: 131–144, 2008.
Crowder G, Pexa B, Ford K, Waxman J. The Validation of a Portable Dual-Force Plate System for Assessing Countermovement Jump Performance. Atlanta, GA: Conference: American Society of Biomechanics, 2020.
Dos'Santos T, Jones PA, Comfort P, Thomas C. Effect of different onset thresholds on isometric midthigh pull force-time variables. J Strength Cond Res 31: 3463–3473, 2017.
Dos'Santos T, Lake J, Jones PA, Comfort P. Effect of low-pass filtering on isometric midthigh pull kinetics. J Strength Cond Res 32: 983–989, 2018.
Guppy SN, Brady CJ, Kotani Y, et al. A comparison of manual and automatic force-onset identification methodologies and their effect on force-time characteristics in the isometric midthigh pull. Sports Biomech 1–18: 2021.
Harry JR. MATLAB guide for analyzing countermovement jump strategies and performance over time. Strength Cond J 43: 44–53, 2021.
Hawkin Dynamics. Examining the validity of the Hawkin Dynamics force plates. Available at: https://f.hubspotusercontent10.net/hubfs/5212164/White%20Paper_Validity2Bertec.pdf . Accessed July 2021.
Heishman AD, Daub BD, Miller RM, Freitas EDS, Frantz BA, Bemben MG. Countermovement jump reliability performed with and without an arm swing in NCAA Division 1 intercollegiate basketball players. J Strength Cond Res 34: 546–558, 2020.
James LP, Roberts LA, Haff GG, Kelly VG, Beckman EM. Validity and reliability of a portable isometric mid-thigh clean pull. J Strength Cond Res 31: 1378–1386, 2017.
Koo TK, Li MY. A guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. J Chiropr Med 15: 155–163, 2016.
Lin LI-K. A concordance correlation coefficient to evaluate reproducibility. Biometrics 45: 255–268, 1989.
Linthorne NP. Analysis of standing vertical jumps using a force platform. Am J Phys 69: 1198–1204, 2001.
Lombard W, Reid S, Pearson K, Lambert M. Reliability of metrics associated with a counter-movement jump performed on a force plate. Meas Phys Educ Exerc Sci 21: 235–243, 2017.
Ludbrook J. Linear regression analysis for comparing two measurers or methods of measurement: But which regression? Clin Exp Pharmacol Physiol 37: 692–699, 2010.
Ludbrook J. A primer for biomedical scientists on how to execute Model II linear regression analysis. Clin Exp Pharmacol Physiol 39: 329–335, 2012.
McBride GB. A proposal for strength-of-agreement criteria for Lin's concordance correlation coefficient. NIWA Client Rep HAM2005-062 62, 2005.
Merrigan J, Rentz L, Hornsby G, et al. Comparisons of countermovement jump force-time characteristics among NCAA Division I American football athletes: Use of Principal Component Analysis. J Strength Cond Res 36: 411–419, 2022.
Merrigan JJ, Martin JR. Is the OUTPUT Sports Unit reliable and valid when estimating back squat and bench press concentric velocity? J Strength Cond Res 36: 2069–2076, 2022.
Merrigan JJ, Stone JD, Galster SM, Hagen JA. Analyzing force-time curves: Comparison of commercially available automated software and custom MATLAB analyses. J Strength Cond Res 36: 2387–2402, 2022.
Merrigan JJ, Stone JD, Hornsby WG, Hagen JA. Identifying reliable and relatable force–time metrics in athletes—considerations for the isometric mid-thigh pull and countermovement jump. Sports 9: 3, 2020.
Merrigan JJ, Stone JD, Martin JR, Hornsby WG, Galster SM, Hagen JA. Applying force plate technology to inform human performance programming in tactical populations. Appl Sci 11: 6538, 2021.
Merrigan JJ, Stone JD, Ramadan J, Hagen JA, Thompson AG. Dimensionality reduction differentiates sensitive force-time characteristics from loaded and unloaded conditions throughout competitive military training. Sustainability 13: 6105, 2021.
Merrigan JJ, Stone JD, Thompson AG, Hornsby WG, Hagen JA. Monitoring neuromuscular performance in military personnel. Int J Environ Res Public Health 17: 9147, 2020.
Merrigan JJ, Stone JD, Wagle JP, et al. Using random forest regression to determine influential force-time metrics for countermovement jump height: A technical report. J Strength Cond Res 36: 277–283, 2022.
Nibali ML, Tombleson T, Brady PH, Wagner P. Influence of familiarization and competitive level on the reliability of countermovement vertical jump kinetic and kinematic variables. J Strength Cond Res 29: 2827–2835, 2015.
Ortega DR, Rodríguez Bíes EC, Berral de la Rosa FJ. Analysis of the vertical ground reaction forces and temporal factors in the landing phase of a countermovement jump. J Sports Sci Med 9: 282–287, 2010.
Owen NJ, Watkins J, Kilduff LP, Bevan HR, Bennett MA. Development of a criterion method to determine peak mechanical power output in a countermovement jump. J Strength Cond Res 28: 1552–1558, 2014.
Pérez-Castilla A, Weakley J, García-Pinillos F, Rojas FJ, García-Ramos A. Influence of countermovement depth on the countermovement jump-derived reactive strength index modified. Eur J Sport Sci 21: 1606–1616, 2021.
R Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing: Vienna Austria, 2022. Available at: https://www.R-project.org . Accessed July 2022.
Street G, McMillan S, Board W, Rasmussen M, Heneghan JM. Sources of error in determining countermovement jump height with the impulse method. J Appl Biomech 17: 43–54, 2001.
Turner J, Wagner T, Langhals B. Biomechanical and psychological predictors of failure in the Air force physical fitness test. Sports 10: 54, 2022.
Vanrenterghem J, De Clercq D, Cleven PV. Necessary precautions in measuring correct vertical jumping height by means of force plate measurements. Ergonomics 44: 814–818, 2001.
Warton DI, Duursma RA, Falster DS, Taskinen S. Smatr 3– an R package for estimation and inference about allometric lines. Methods Ecol Evol 3: 257–259, 2012.
Wu PP-Y, Sterkenburg N, Everett K, Chapman DW, White N, Mengersen K. Predicting fatigue using countermovement jump force-time signatures: PCA can distinguish neuromuscular versus metabolic fatigue. PLoS One 14: e0219295, 2019.