Department of Sports, Faculty of Physical Activity and Sport Sciences, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, Madrid, Spain.
Department of Sports and Computer, Faculty of Physical Activity and Sport Sciences, Universidad Pablo de Olavide, Sevilla, Spain.
J Biomech. 2019 Oct 11;95:109281. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2019.07.025. Epub 2019 Jul 31.
The maximum velocity (Vmax) reached during countermovement jumps (CMJ) has been considered a performance indicator to evaluate vertical jump ability. The aim of this study was to compare Vmax during loaded CMJ (CMJloaded) using three different technologies to show a criterion for selecting the more appropriate depending on its use. Nine recreationally active men performed a CMJloaded test. Five jumps were made in each of 6 series with a 20- kg barbell + 0, + 5, + 10, + 15, + 20 and + 25 kg, with 2 seconds rest between the jumps and 5 minutes rest between the series to explore a wide range of speeds. Vmax was obtained from force platform, inertial device and linear encoder technologies. Bland-Altman plots and mean differences were used to compare devices. Reproducibility was tested using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for single measures and typical error (TE). All technologies showed high levels of reproducibility, ICC higher than 0.75 and TE lower than 10 %. There were non-significant differences in Vmax between each pair of technologies (linear encoder 2.11 ± 0.24 m·s, accelerometer 2.11 ± 0.26 m·s, force platform 2.12 ± 0.24 m·s) reporting a very low bias. However the limits of agreement between the different technologies evaluated were high (± 0.33 m·s). In conclusion, the accelerometer, linear encoder and force platform were suitably reliable to be used to measure Vmax during loaded vertical jumps but their values were not interchangeable.
最大速度（Vmax）在反跳（CMJ）期间达到，被认为是评估垂直跳跃能力的表现指标。本研究的目的是比较使用三种不同技术在负载反跳（CMJloaded）期间的 Vmax，以展示根据其用途选择更合适的技术的标准。9 名休闲活跃的男性进行了 CMJloaded 测试。每个系列进行 5 次跳跃，杠铃+0、+5、+10、+15、+20 和+25kg，每次跳跃之间休息 2 秒，每个系列之间休息 5 分钟，以探索广泛的速度范围。Vmax 是从力量平台、惯性装置和线性编码器技术中获得的。Bland-Altman 图和平均差异用于比较设备。使用单测和典型误差（TE）的组内相关系数（ICC）测试可重复性。所有技术都显示出高水平的可重复性，ICC 高于 0.75，TE 低于 10%。在每对技术之间，Vmax 没有显著差异（线性编码器 2.11±0.24 m·s，加速度计 2.11±0.26 m·s，力量平台 2.12±0.24 m·s），报告了非常低的偏差。然而，评估的不同技术之间的协议界限很高（±0.33 m·s）。总之，加速度计、线性编码器和力量平台都适合可靠地用于测量负载垂直跳跃期间的 Vmax，但它们的值不可互换。
