Journal of Athletic EnhancementISSN: 2324-9080

Reach Us +18507546199
All submissions of the EM system will be redirected to Online Manuscript Submission System. Authors are requested to submit articles directly to Online Manuscript Submission System of respective journal.

Research Article, J Athl Enhanc Vol: 7 Issue: 1

A Novel Method to Reduce the Impact of Countermovement Jump Monitoring In Professional Rugby Athletes

Francisco Tavares1,2*, Travis Mcmaster1, Phil Healey2, Tiaki Brett Smith1,2 and Matthew Driller1

1University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand

2Chiefs Super Rugby, Hamilton, New Zealand

*Corresponding Author : Francisco Tavares
3 Lynedoch Street, Flat 1/1 G36EF, Glasgow, United Kingdom
Tel: +44 7507 391 036
E-mail:
[email protected]

Received: October 11, 2017 Accepted: January 12, 2018 Published: January 19, 2018

Citation: Tavares F, Mcmaster T, Healey P, Smith TB, Driller M (2018) A Novel Method to Reduce the Impact of Countermovement Jump Monitoring In Professional Rugby Athletes. J Athl Enhanc 7:1. doi: 10.4172/2324-9080.1000282

Abstract

The countermovement jump (CMJ) is widely used to monitor jump performance, with greater interest being demonstrated in the propulsive phase. When landing from a CMJ, high forces are produced; this can increase the risk of injury. The present study aimed to test the validity and reliability of a countermovement jump to a box (CMBJ) where the forces associated with the landing are reduced. Eighteen professional rugby athletes (age=22 ± 2 years; body mass=104.2 ± 13.0 kg; height=187.4 ± 7.1 cm) performed 3 CMJ’s and 3 CMBJ’s on 3 different occasions. Net impulse (N.s), peak and mean absolute and relative force (N; N/kg) were obtained from a force plate system. The kinetic validity of the CMBJ was assessed by calculating the intraclass correlation coefficient, Pearson product-moment correlation, Cohen’s effect sizes and statistical hypothesis testing (paired t-test) in comparison to the CMJ. Intraday and interday reliability was assessed for each variable for both jumping conditions by calculating typical error, within subject coefficient of variation and intraclass correlation coefficient. Nonsignificant, trivial differences between the CMJ and CMBJ were observed for all jump variables. Low within-subject variability was observed between the CMJ and CMBJ for all variables. Interday and intraday variability showed good reliability and an almost perfect interday agreement score. In conclusion, net impulse, peak and mean force and relative peak and mean force obtained from a CMBJ are valid and reliable to monitor jump performance. This data demonstrates that the CMBJ is a viable alternative to monitor jump performance in athletes.

Keywords: Box jump; Kinetic; Neuromuscular; Monitor

Track Your Manuscript

Share This Page