Racine Kevin, Warren Meghan, Smith Craig, Lininger Monica R
Northern Arizona University.
Northern Arizona University; Smith Performance Center.
Int J Sports Phys Ther. 2021 Feb 2;16(1):162-168. doi: 10.26603/001c.18662.
The Tuck Jump Assessment (TJA) is a test used to assess technique flaws during a 10-second, high intensity, jumping bout. Although the TJA has broad clinical applicability, there is no standardized training to maximize the TJA measurement properties.
HYPOTHESIS/PURPOSE: To determine the reliability of the TJA using varied healthcare professionals following an online standardized training program. The authors hypothesized that the total score will have moderate to excellent levels of intra- and interrater reliability.
Cross-sectional reliability.
A website was created by a physical therapist (PT) with videos, written descriptors of the 10 TJA technique flaws, and examples of what constituted no flaw, minor flaw, or major flaw (0,1,2) using published standards. The website was then validated (both face and content) by four experts. Three raters of different professions: a PT, an AT, and a Strength and Conditioning Coach Certified (SCCC) were selected due to their expertise with injury and movement. Raters used the online standardized training, scored 41 videos of participants' TJAs, then scored them again two weeks later. Reliability estimates were determined using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) for total scores of 10 technique flaws and Krippendorff α (K α) for the individual technique flaws (ordinal).
Eleven of 50 individual technique flaws were above the acceptable level (K α = 0.80). The total score had moderate interrater reliability in both sessions (Session 1: ICC = 0.64; 95% CI (Confidence Interval) (0.34-0.81); Standard Error Measurement (SEM) = 0.66 technique flaws and Session 2: ICC = 0.56; 95% CI (0.04-0.79); SEM = 1.30). Rater 1had a good reliability (ICC = 0.76; 95% CI (0.54-0.87); SEM = 0.26), rater 2 had a moderate reliability (ICC = 0.62; 95% CI (0.24-0.80); SEM =0.41) and rater 3 had excellent reliability (ICC = 0.98; 95% CI (0.97-0.99); SEM =0.01).
All raters had at least good reliability estimates for the total score. The same level of consistency was not seen when evaluating each technique flaw. These findings suggest that the total score may not be as accurate when compared to individual technique flaws and should be used with caution.
3b.
屈膝纵跳评估（TJA）是一项用于评估10秒高强度跳跃动作中技术缺陷的测试。尽管TJA具有广泛的临床适用性，但目前尚无标准化培训来最大化其测量属性。
假设/目的：通过在线标准化培训项目，确定不同医疗专业人员使用TJA的可靠性。作者假设总分在评分者内和评分者间的可靠性将达到中等至优秀水平。
横断面可靠性研究。
由一名物理治疗师（PT）创建了一个网站，其中包含视频、10项TJA技术缺陷的书面描述，以及根据已发表标准确定的无缺陷、轻微缺陷或重大缺陷（0、1、2）的示例。然后由四位专家对该网站进行了效度验证（包括表面效度和内容效度）。由于他们在损伤和动作方面的专业知识，选择了三位不同专业的评分者：一名PT、一名运动训练师（AT）和一名认证的体能训练教练（SCCC）。评分者使用在线标准化培训，对41名参与者的TJA视频进行评分，两周后再次评分。使用组内相关系数（ICC）确定10项技术缺陷总分的可靠性估计值，使用Krippendorff α（K α）确定单个技术缺陷（有序变量） 的可靠性估计值。
50项单个技术缺陷中有11项高于可接受水平（K α = 0.80）。总分在两个测试阶段的评分者间可靠性均为中等（第一阶段：ICC = 0.64；95%置信区间（CI）（0.34 - 0.81）；测量标准误（SEM）= 0.66个技术缺陷；第二阶段：ICC = 0.56；95%CI（0.04 - 0.79）；SEM = 1.30）。评分者1的可靠性良好（ICC = 0.76；95%CI（0.54 - 0.87）；SEM = 0.26），评分者2的可靠性中等（ICC = 0.62；95%CI（0.24 - 0.80）；SEM = 0.41），评分者3的可靠性优秀（ICC = 0.98；95%CI（0.97 - 0.99）；SEM = 0.01）。
所有评分者对总分的可靠性估计至少良好。在评估每个技术缺陷时，未观察到相同程度的一致性。这些结果表明，与单个技术缺陷相比，总分可能不够准确，应谨慎使用。
3b。
