Kinetic and Kinematic Assessment of the Band-Assisted Countermovement Jump.

ABSTRACT: Fernandes, JFT, Arede, J, Clarke, H, Garcia-Ramos, A, Perez-Castilla, A, Norris, JP, Wilkins, CA, and Dingley, AF. Kinetic and kinematic assessment of the band-assisted countermovement jump. J Strength Cond Res 37(8): 1588-1593, 2023-This study sought to elucidate kinetic and kinematic differences between unloaded and band-assisted countermovement jumps (CMJs). In a randomized order, 20 healthy subjects (mass 84.5 ± 18.6 kg) completed 3 repetitions of CMJs across 3 conditions: unloaded (at body mass), low, and moderate band (8.4 ± 1.9 and 13.3 ± 3.3 kg body mass reduction, respectively). For all repetitions, a force platform and linear position transducer were used to record and calculate kinetic and kinematic data. Body mass was significantly different between the unloaded, low, and moderate band conditions ( p < 0.05). Peak velocity, absolute peak, and mean force and movement duration displayed a trend that was mostly related to the condition (i.e., unloaded > low > moderate) ( p < 0.05). The opposing trend (i.e., moderate > low > unloaded) was generally observed for relative peak and mean force, reactive strength index modified, and flight time ( p < 0.05). No differences were observed for mean velocity, movement duration, and absolute and relative landing forces ( p > 0.05). The use of band assistance during CMJs can alter force, time, and velocity variables. Practitioners should be aware of the potential positive and negative effects of band assistance during CMJs.

Assessment of Back-Squat Performance at Submaximal Loads: Is the Reliability Affected by the Variable, Exercise Technique, or Repetition Criterion?

This study aimed to compare the between-session reliability of different performance variables during 2 variants of the Smith machine back-squat exercise. Twenty-six male wrestlers performed 5 testing sessions (a 1-repetition maximum [1RM] session, and 4 experimental sessions [2 with the pause and 2 with the rebound technique]). Each experimental session consisted of performing 3 repetitions against 5 loads (45-55-65-75-85% of the 1RM). Mean velocity (MV), mean power (MP), peak velocity (PV), and peak power (PP) variables were recorded by a linear position transducer (GymAware PowerTool). The best and average scores of the 3 repetitions were considered for statistical analyses. The coefficient of variation (CV) ranged from 3.89% (best PV score at 55% 1 RM using the pause technique) to 10.29% (average PP score at 85% 1 RM using the rebound technique). PP showed a lower reliability than MV, MP, and PV (CVratio ≥ 1.26). The reliability was comparable between the exercise techniques (CVratio = 1.08) and between the best and average scores (CVratio = 1.04). These results discourage the use of PP to assess back-squat performance at submaximal loads. The remaining variables (MV, MP, or PV), exercise techniques (pause or rebound), and repetition criteria (best score or average score) can be indistinctly used due to their acceptable and comparable reliability.

Assessment of the loaded squat jump and countermovement jump exercises with a linear velocity transducer: which velocity variable provides the highest reliability?

This study aimed to compare the between-session reliability of three typically measured velocity variables (mean velocity [MV], mean propulsive velocity [MPV], and maximum velocity [Vmax]) to assess vertical jump performance. Totally, 23 men had their squat jump (SJ) and countermovement jump (CMJ) tested against five different loading conditions (17, 30, 45, 60 and 75 kg) during two consecutive weeks. The two sessions of each jump type were performed within the same week separated by 48-72 h. The main finding was a significant difference in reliability between the variables, which were ranked from the highest to the lowest reliable as follows (median coefficient of variation [CV] and range): Vmax (CV = 2.35% [1.85%-3.23%]) >MV (CV = 3.29% [2.18%-4.40%]) >MPV (CV = 3.69% [2.08%-5.17%]). A significant variable × exercise interaction was also observed showing that the differences in reliability between the variables were meaningful during the SJ (MV: CV = 3.93% [3.06%-4.40%], MPV: CV = 4.61% [4.07%-5.17%], and Vmax: CV = 2.14% [1.85%-2.71%]), while no significant differences were observed for the CMJ (MV: CV = 2.43% [2.18%-3.70%], MPV: CV = 2.71% [2.08%-3.63%], and Vmax: CV = 2.40% [1.97%-3.23%]). These results suggest that the Vmax should be the recommended variable for obtaining a reproducible measure of lower-body ballistic performance, especially during the SJ exercise.

Reliability of Low-Cost Near-Infrared Spectroscopy in the Determination of Muscular Oxygen Saturation and Hemoglobin Concentration during Rest, Isometric and Dynamic Strength Activity.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to establish the reliability of the Humon Hex near-infrared reflectance spectroscopy (NIRS) in determining muscle oxygen saturation (SmO2) and hemoglobin concentration (Hgb) at rest and during isometric and dynamic strength exercises using a functional electromechanical dynamometer (FEMD). METHODS: The SmO2 and Hgb values of sixteen healthy adults (mean ± standard deviation (SD): Age = 36.1 ± 6.4 years) were recorded at rest and during isometry (8 s), dynamic strength I (initial load of 40% of the average isometric load, with 2 kg increments until muscle failure) and dynamic strength II (same as I, but with an initial load of 40% of the maximum isometric load) activity. To evaluate the reliability in the determination of SmO2 and Hgb of this device, intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), standard error of measurement (SEM) and coefficient of variation (CV) were obtained. RESULTS: The main results obtained are SmO2 at rest (CV = 5.76%, SEM = 3.81, ICC = 0.90), isometric strength (CV = 3.03%, SEM = 2.08, ICC = 0.92), dynamic strength I (CV = 10.6, SEM = 7.17, ICC = 0.22) and dynamic strength II (CV = 9.69, SEM = 6.75, ICC = 0.32); Hgb at rest (CV = 1.97%, SEM = 0.24, ICC = 0.65), isometric strength (CV = 0.98%, SEM = 0.12, ICC = 0.96), dynamic strength I (CV = 3.25, SEM = 0.40, ICC = 0.54) and dynamic strength II (CV = 2.74, SEM = 0.34, ICC = 0.65). CONCLUSIONS: The study shows that Humon Hex is a reliable device to obtain SmO2 and Hgb data in healthy adult subjects at rest and during isometric strength, providing precision for measurements made with this device.

Assessment of the force-velocity relationship during vertical jumps: influence of the starting position, analysis procedures and number of loads.

This study aimed to compare the reliability and magnitude of the force-velocity (F-V) relationship parameters between the squat jumps performed from the 90° (SJ90) and self-preferred knee angle (SJpref). A secondary aim was to explore the effect of the analysis procedure (force platform [FP] and Samozino's [SAM] method) and the number of loads tested (three- and two-point methods) on the F-V relationships. Twelve men were tested in two sessions during the SJ90 and SJpref. Two identical blocks of jumps were performed in each session against three external loads. The F-V relationship parameters (maximum force, maximum velocity, F-V slope and maximum power) were determined at each block through the FP and SAM procedures using the data collected under three (three-point method) or only the two most distant loads (two-point method). The average coefficient of variation (CV) of the four F-V parameters revealed a higher reliability for the SJ90 compared to the SJpref (5.86% vs. 7.55%; CVratio = 1.29) with more pronounced differences using the FP (CVratio = 1.43) than the SAM procedure (CVratio = 1.14), and higher reliability for the SAM compared to the FP (6.14% vs. 7.27%; CVratio = 1.18). The SJpref and SAM procedures provided comparable or higher magnitude of the F-V relationship parameters than the SJ90 and FP, respectively. The three- and two-point methods revealed a comparable reliability and trivial differences in the magnitude of the F-V relationship parameters. The routine testing procedure of the F-V relationship could be simplified using the SJpref, the SAM procedure and the two-point method.

Assessment of Loaded Squat Jump Height With a Free-Weight Barbell and Smith Machine: Comparison of the Takeoff Velocity and Flight Time Procedures.

Pérez-Castilla, A, McMahon, JJ, Comfort, P, and García-Ramos, A. Assessment of loaded squat jump height with a free-weight barbell and Smith machine: comparison of the takeoff velocity and flight time procedures. J Strength Cond Res 34(3): 671-677, 2020-The aims of this study were to compare the reliability and magnitude of jump height between the 2 standard procedures of analyzing force platform data to estimate jump height (takeoff velocity [TOV] and flight time [FT]) in the loaded squat jump (SJ) exercise performed with a free-weight barbell and in a Smith machine. Twenty-three collegiate men (age, 23.1 ± 3.2 years; body mass, 74.7 ± 7.3 kg; height, 177.1 ± 7.0 cm) were tested twice for each SJ type (free-weight barbell and Smith machine) with 17-, 30-, 45-, 60-, and 75-kg loads. No substantial differences in reliability were observed between the TOV (coefficient of variation [CV], 9.88%; intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC], 0.82) and FT (CV, 8.68%; ICC, 0.88) procedures (CV ratio, 1.14), whereas the Smith SJ (CV, 7.74%; ICC, 0.87) revealed a higher reliability than the free-weight SJ (CV, 9.88%; ICC, 0.81; CV ratio, 1.28). The TOV procedure provided higher magnitudes of jump height than the FT procedure for the loaded Smith machine SJ (systematic bias, 2.64 cm; p ≤ 0.05), whereas no significant differences between the TOV and FT procedures were observed in the free-weight SJ exercise (systematic bias, 0.26 cm; p > 0.05). Heteroscedasticity of the errors was observed for the Smith machine SJ (r = 0.177) with increasing differences in favor of the TOV procedure for the trials with lower jump height (i.e., higher external loads). Based on these results, the use of a Smith machine in conjunction with the FT more accurately determine jump height during the loaded SJ.

Assessment of unloaded and loaded squat jump performance with a force platform: Which jump starting threshold provides more reliable outcomes?

This study aimed to explore the influence of different onset thresholds on the between-session reliability and magnitude of squat jump (SJ) performance. Twenty men were tested on two sessions separated by 48 h against external loads of 0.5, 30 and 60 kg. The initiation of the jump was defined as the first instant in which the vertical ground reaction force exceeded system weight by 10 N (10 N), 50 N (50 N), 1% of system weight (1%SW), 10% of system weight (10%SW) and five standard deviation of system weight minus 30 ms (5SDSW). The following variables were calculated from the force-time signal collected on a force platform: mean, peak and time to peak values of force, power and velocity, average rate of force development, peak rate of force development, rate of force development index, impulse, jump height, and push-off time. The 50 N, 10%SW and 5SDSW thresholds generally revealed a higher reliability than the 10 N and 1%SW thresholds (97 and 21 out of 252 comparisons for the coefficient of variation and intraclass correlation coefficient, respectively). The magnitude of most of the variables calculated using the 50 N and 10%SW thresholds significantly differed with respect to the 10 N, 1%SW and 5SDSW thresholds (P < 0.05). These results suggest that both the reliability and magnitude of SJ performance variables are influenced by the jump starting threshold. The 50 N, 10%SW and 5SDSW thresholds maximise the reliability of SJ performance variables, while the 5SDSW should be recommended since it considers more force signal than the 50 N and 10%SW thresholds.

Reliability and Concurrent Validity of Seven Commercially Available Devices for the Assessment of Movement Velocity at Different Intensities During the Bench Press.

Pérez-Castilla, A, Piepoli, A, Delgado-García, G, Garrido-Blanca, G, and García-Ramos, A. Reliability and concurrent validity of seven commercially available devices for the assessment of movement velocity at different intensities during the bench press. J Strength Cond Res 33(5): 1258-1265, 2019-The aim of this study was to compare the reliability and validity of 7 commercially available devices to measure movement velocity during the bench press exercise. Fourteen men completed 2 testing sessions. One-repetition maximum (1RM) in the bench press exercise was determined in the first session. The second testing session consisted of performing 3 repetitions against 5 loads (45, 55, 65, 75, and 85% of 1RM). The mean velocity was simultaneously measured using an optical motion sensing system (Trio-OptiTrack; "gold-standard") and 7 commercially available devices: 1 linear velocity transducer (T-Force), 2 linear position transducers (Chronojump and Speed4Lift), 1 camera-based optoelectronic system (Velowin), 1 smartphone application (PowerLift), and 2 inertial measurement units (IMUs) (PUSH band and Beast sensor). The devices were ranked from the most to the least reliable as follows: (a) Speed4Lift (coefficient of variation [CV] = 2.61%); (b) Velowin (CV = 3.99%), PowerLift (3.97%), Trio-OptiTrack (CV = 4.04%), T-Force (CV = 4.35%), and Chronojump (CV = 4.53%); (c) PUSH band (CV = 9.34%); and (d) Beast sensor (CV = 35.0%). A practically perfect association between the Trio-OptiTrack system and the different devices was observed (Pearson's product-moment correlation coefficient (r) range = 0.947-0.995; p < 0.001) with the only exception of the Beast sensor (r = 0.765; p < 0.001). These results suggest that linear velocity/position transducers, camera-based optoelectronic systems, and the smartphone application could be used to obtain accurate velocity measurements for restricted linear movements, whereas the IMUs used in this study were less reliable and valid.

Assessment of Upper-Body Ballistic Performance Through the Bench Press Throw Exercise: Which Velocity Outcome Provides the Highest Reliability?

García-Ramos, A, Haff, GG, Jiménez-Reyes, and P, Pérez-Castilla, A. Assessment of upper-body ballistic performance through the bench press throw exercise: Which velocity outcome provides the highest reliability? J Strength Cond Res 32(10): 2701-2707, 2018-This study aimed to compare the between-session reliability of 3 velocity variables (mean velocity [MV], mean propulsive velocity [MPV], and maximum velocity [Vmax]) to assess bench press throw (BPT) performance. Twenty-one men were tested during 2 consecutive weeks in 2 variants of the BPT exercise (concentric-only and eccentric-concentric) against 5 different loading conditions (17, 27, 37, 47, and 57 kg). The 2 sessions of each BPT variant were performed within the same week separated by 48-72 hours. The main findings revealed that (a) the highest reliability was observed for Vmax (median coefficient of variation [CV] and range) (CV = 2.14% [1.43-4.02%]), followed by MV (CV = 3.18% [1.47-5.22%]), and finally, the MPV was the least reliable variable (CV = 4.27% [1.98-6.38%]), (b) all velocity variables demonstrated a higher reliability during the eccentric-concentric BPT (CV = 2.41% [1.43-5.30%]) when compared with the concentric-only BPT (CV = 4.02% [1.74-6.38%]), and (c) the reliability tended to decrease with the increment of the load: 17 kg (CV = 2.12% [1.43-4.68%]), 27 kg (CV = 1.96% [1.74-3.86%]), 37 kg (CV = 2.98% [2.47-5.67%]), 47 kg (CV = 4.59% [2.32-6.38%]), and 57 kg (CV = 3.92% [1.95-5.52%]). These results indicate that the assessment of the Vmax should be performed with a light-loading condition during the eccentric-concentric BPT for obtaining the most reproducible measure of upper-body ballistic performance.

Assessment of leg muscles mechanical capacities: Which jump, loading, and variable type provide the most reliable outcomes?

This study aimed to explore the strength of the force-velocity (F-V) relationship of lower limb muscles and the reliability of its parameters (maximum force [F0], slope [a], maximum velocity [V0], and maximum power [P0]). Twenty-three men were tested in two different jump types (squat and countermovement jump: SJ and CMJ), performed under two different loading conditions (free weight and Smith machine: Free and Smith) with 0, 17, 30, 45, 60, and 75 kg loads. The maximum and averaged values of F and V were obtained for the F-V relationship modelling. All F-V relationships were strong and linear independently whether observed from the averaged across the participants (r ≥ 0.98) or individual data (r = 0.94-0.98), while their parameters were generally highly reliable (F0 [CV: 4.85%, ICC: 0.87], V0 [CV: 6.10%, ICC: 0.82], a [CV: 10.5%, ICC: 0.81], and P0 [CV: 3.5%, ICC: 0.93]). Both the strength of the F-V relationships and the reliability of their parameters were significantly higher for (1) the CMJ over the SJ, (2) the Free over the Smith loading type, and (3) the maximum over the averaged F and V variables. In conclusion, although the F-V relationships obtained from all the jumps tested were linear and generally highly reliable, the less appropriate choice for testing the F-V relationship could be through the averaged F and V data obtained from the SJ performed either in a Free weight or in a Smith machine. Insubstantial differences exist among the other combinations tested.