Niemeyer Philipp, Niederer Daniel, Giesche Florian, Janko Maren, Frank Johannes, Vogt Lutz, Banzer Winfried
Department of Sports Medicine, Goethe University Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Department of Sports Medicine, Goethe University Frankfurt am Main, Germany; Preventive and Sports Medicine, Institute of Occupational, Social and Environmental Medicine, Hospital of the Goethe-University Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Clin Biomech (Bristol). 2019 Dec;70:72-79. doi: 10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2019.08.003. Epub 2019 Aug 5.
We aimed to delineate if unanticipated jump-landing assessments delivers complementary information to those of commonly used hop and jump tests after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.
Eleven participants (5 males) performed a series of unanticipated jump-landings and traditional hop and jump performance tests (single leg hops for distance, triple crossover hops for distance and drop jumps). The number of mistrials, time to stabilization and peak ground reaction force (pGRF) at landing and jump/hop distance were measured. Pearson correlations to find potential associations between the unanticipated jump-landing-values and the traditional jump/hop performance tests were calculated twice: once for the affected and once for the unaffected legs. t-Tests for dependent samples were used to detect differences between affected and unaffected leg within each test condition.
The pGRF at unanticipated landing significantly correlated to the pGRF at drop jump landing (r = 0.68) and the hopping distance after the triple crossover hops (r = 0.71, each p < .05). No other significant correlation occurred (p > .05). Hopping distance after single leg hops (mean: 110.2 cm vs. 95.5 cm) and triple crossover hops for distance (mean: 315.3 cm vs. 294.2 cm) showed significant differences between the unaffected and the reconstructed leg (p < .05). Other parameters showed no significant between-legs differences (p > .05).
Both, the reconstructed and the contralateral leg seems to be affected. Unanticipated jump landing tasks deliver information beyond those of commonly used jump and hop tests, the thereby assessed abilities may thus be a complementary aspect of dynamic knee function than those assessed with classic tests.
我们旨在确定在进行前交叉韧带重建后，意外的跳跃着陆评估是否能为常用的单腿跳和多级跳测试提供补充信息。
11名参与者（5名男性）进行了一系列意外的跳跃着陆以及传统的单腿跳和多级跳性能测试（单腿跳远、三级交叉跳远和下蹲跳）。测量了失误次数、稳定时间、着陆时的地面峰值反作用力（pGRF）以及跳跃/单腿跳距离。计算了意外跳跃着陆值与传统跳跃/单腿跳性能测试之间的皮尔逊相关性，分两次进行：一次针对患侧腿，一次针对健侧腿。使用配对样本t检验来检测每种测试条件下患侧腿和健侧腿之间的差异。
意外着陆时的pGRF与下蹲跳着陆时的pGRF显著相关（r = 0.68），与三级交叉跳远后的跳跃距离显著相关（r = 0.71，p均<0.05）。未出现其他显著相关性（p>0.05）。单腿跳远（平均值：110.2厘米对95.5厘米）和三级交叉跳远（平均值：315.3厘米对294.2厘米）的跳跃距离在健侧腿和重建腿之间存在显著差异（p<0.05）。其他参数在两腿之间未显示出显著差异（p>0.05）。
重建腿和对侧腿似乎都受到了影响。意外的跳跃着陆任务所提供的信息超出了常用的跳跃和单腿跳测试，因此所评估的能力可能是动态膝关节功能的一个补充方面，相较于经典测试所评估的能力。
