Radulovic V, Kwong D, Green A
Department of Sport and Movement Studies, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Johannesburg, South Africa.
S Afr J Sports Med. 2024 Sep 15;36(1):v36i1a16929. doi: 10.17159/2078-516X/2024/v36i1a16929. eCollection 2024.
The countermovement jump (CMJ) is an integral part of force and velocity profiling; a movement that is regularly implemented in training protocols and testing of athletic performance. Adding external loads to CMJs may have an added benefit for assessing gains in power and, in turn, monitoring progressive development. However, these added loads can displace the centre of mass of individuals, which may alter jump kinetics.
The study aimed to evaluate kinetics across various incremental modes of loading (barbell, trapezius barbell, and dumbbell) CMJs.
Thirty-two male athletes (age: 19±2 years; height: 1.86±0.06 m, mass: 90.4±5.3 kg) completed three weighted CMJs (20, 40, 60 kg) across three bar-type modes of loading (barbell, trapezius barbell, and dumbbell). Jump metrics were measured using a wearable accelerometer. A repeated measures ANOVA was used to compare jump metrics (p<0.05).
The results indicated changes in jump kinetics as added loads increased across all bar-type jump modes (p<0.001). Additionally, jump modes yielded different jump kinetics (p<0.001). Specifically, dumbbell CMJs produced the greatest force (2559 ± 462 N) and power (4861±1632 W) outputs. In contrast, the trapezius barbell consistently produced significantly (p<0.001) higher velocity (2.52±0.44 m.s) and acceleration (12.59±4.49 m.s), with the barbell never producing the highest kinetic metrics. The athletes' ranges of movement and comfort loading levels during the CMJs may be influential factors affecting vertical jump output metrics.
Overall, jump kinetics were altered by loads and jump types. Practically, different loading methods may target distinct jump variables allowing for individualised training programs specific for the athletes' needs.
反向纵跳（CMJ）是力量和速度分析的一个重要组成部分；这是一种在训练方案和运动表现测试中经常实施的动作。在CMJ中增加外部负荷可能对评估力量增长有额外的益处，进而监测渐进发展情况。然而，这些额外的负荷会使个体的重心发生位移，这可能会改变跳跃动力学。
本研究旨在评估在各种递增负荷模式（杠铃、斜方肌杠铃和哑铃）下CMJ的动力学情况。
32名男性运动员（年龄：19±2岁；身高：1.86±0.06米，体重：90.4±5.3千克）在三种杠铃类型的负荷模式（杠铃、斜方肌杠铃和哑铃）下完成了三次负重CMJ（20、40、60千克）。使用可穿戴式加速度计测量跳跃指标。采用重复测量方差分析来比较跳跃指标（p<0.05）。
结果表明，随着所有杠铃类型跳跃模式下负荷的增加，跳跃动力学发生了变化（p<0.001）。此外，跳跃模式产生了不同的跳跃动力学（p<0.001）。具体而言，哑铃CMJ产生了最大的力（2559±462牛）和功率（4861±1632瓦）输出。相比之下，斜方肌杠铃始终产生显著更高的速度（2.52±0.44米/秒）和加速度（12.59±4.49米/秒²）（p<0.001），杠铃从未产生最高的动力学指标。运动员在CMJ过程中的运动范围和舒适负荷水平可能是影响垂直跳跃输出指标的因素。
总体而言，跳跃动力学受负荷和跳跃类型的影响。实际上，不同的负荷方法可能针对不同的跳跃变量，从而制定出符合运动员需求的个性化训练计划。
