Do Active-Duty Air Force Personnel With Recent Lower-Body Musculoskeletal Injury Profiles Have Reduced Jump Performances?

IF 2.5 2区 医学 Q2 SPORT SCIENCES
Justin J Merrigan, Nicole Ray, Kristyn Barrett, Maegan O'Connor, Roger Smith, James R Walters, Josh Hagen, Jason Eckerle, Robert Briggs
{"title":"Do Active-Duty Air Force Personnel With Recent Lower-Body Musculoskeletal Injury Profiles Have Reduced Jump Performances?","authors":"Justin J Merrigan, Nicole Ray, Kristyn Barrett, Maegan O'Connor, Roger Smith, James R Walters, Josh Hagen, Jason Eckerle, Robert Briggs","doi":"10.1519/JSC.0000000000005091","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Abstract: </strong>Merrigan, JJ, Ray, N, Barrett, K, O'Connor, M, Smith, R, Walters, JR, Hagen, J, Eckerle, J, and Briggs, R. Do active-duty air force personnel with recent lower-body musculoskeletal injury profiles have reduced jump performances? J Strength Cond Res 39(6): 695-704, 2025-This study aimed to evaluate jump performance in active-duty Air Force service members with recent limited duty profiles because of lower-body musculoskeletal injury or pain (LDP). Eighty-five participants reported LDP, whereas 719 participants reported no lower extremity pain or musculoskeletal injury (No-LDP) within the previous 6 months. Jump assessments consisted of 3 maximal effort arm-swing countermovement jumps (ASCMJs), no arm-swing countermovement jumps (CMJs), bilateral repeated hop test (BHT), CMJs with a weighted vest (LCMJ), and drop jumps (DJ), in that order, on dual force plates. Perceived levels of pain and impaired function were greater in LDP than No-LDP ( p < 0.05). During ASCMJ, LDP (131.07 ± 46.27 N × cm -1 ) had greater peak landing forces than No-LDP (118.49 ± 43.01 N × cm -1 ; p = 0.042, ES = -0.089). For LCMJ, jump height (LDP = 24.34 ± 6.33; No-LDP = 26.55 ± 7.91 cm; p = 0.040; ES = -0.087) and modified reactive strength index (LDP = 24.51 ± 8.59; No-LDP = 27.46 ± 9.85 cm × second -1 ; p = 0.026; ES = -0.100) were lower, whereas peak landing forces (LDP = 174.98 ± 56.01; No-LDP = 158.5 ± 55.5 N × cm -1 ; p = 0.017; ES = 0.101) were greater in LDP than No-LDP. During DJ, No-LDP had higher jump heights (LDP = 25.09 ± 7.09 cm; No-LDP = 27.83 ± 8.73 cm; p = 0.034; ES = -0.091), less passive stiffness (LDP = 11,822.5 ± 4,865.2 N × m; No-LDP = 10,773.2 ± 6,546.0 N × m; p = 0.034; ES = 0.096), and less peak drop landing forces (LDP = 3,572.3 ± 991.4.4 N; No-LDP = 3,282.0 ± 1,011.1 N; p = 0.024; ES = 0.105). Individuals with a recent LDP presented ineffective landing abilities and lower jump heights during more difficult jumping tasks. Therefore, a comprehensive assessment is encouraged to help inform return to duty timelines and ensure adequate recovery and preparedness for full duty.</p>","PeriodicalId":17129,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research","volume":" ","pages":"695-704"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0000000000005091","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/4/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SPORT SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract: Merrigan, JJ, Ray, N, Barrett, K, O'Connor, M, Smith, R, Walters, JR, Hagen, J, Eckerle, J, and Briggs, R. Do active-duty air force personnel with recent lower-body musculoskeletal injury profiles have reduced jump performances? J Strength Cond Res 39(6): 695-704, 2025-This study aimed to evaluate jump performance in active-duty Air Force service members with recent limited duty profiles because of lower-body musculoskeletal injury or pain (LDP). Eighty-five participants reported LDP, whereas 719 participants reported no lower extremity pain or musculoskeletal injury (No-LDP) within the previous 6 months. Jump assessments consisted of 3 maximal effort arm-swing countermovement jumps (ASCMJs), no arm-swing countermovement jumps (CMJs), bilateral repeated hop test (BHT), CMJs with a weighted vest (LCMJ), and drop jumps (DJ), in that order, on dual force plates. Perceived levels of pain and impaired function were greater in LDP than No-LDP ( p < 0.05). During ASCMJ, LDP (131.07 ± 46.27 N × cm -1 ) had greater peak landing forces than No-LDP (118.49 ± 43.01 N × cm -1 ; p = 0.042, ES = -0.089). For LCMJ, jump height (LDP = 24.34 ± 6.33; No-LDP = 26.55 ± 7.91 cm; p = 0.040; ES = -0.087) and modified reactive strength index (LDP = 24.51 ± 8.59; No-LDP = 27.46 ± 9.85 cm × second -1 ; p = 0.026; ES = -0.100) were lower, whereas peak landing forces (LDP = 174.98 ± 56.01; No-LDP = 158.5 ± 55.5 N × cm -1 ; p = 0.017; ES = 0.101) were greater in LDP than No-LDP. During DJ, No-LDP had higher jump heights (LDP = 25.09 ± 7.09 cm; No-LDP = 27.83 ± 8.73 cm; p = 0.034; ES = -0.091), less passive stiffness (LDP = 11,822.5 ± 4,865.2 N × m; No-LDP = 10,773.2 ± 6,546.0 N × m; p = 0.034; ES = 0.096), and less peak drop landing forces (LDP = 3,572.3 ± 991.4.4 N; No-LDP = 3,282.0 ± 1,011.1 N; p = 0.024; ES = 0.105). Individuals with a recent LDP presented ineffective landing abilities and lower jump heights during more difficult jumping tasks. Therefore, a comprehensive assessment is encouraged to help inform return to duty timelines and ensure adequate recovery and preparedness for full duty.

现役空军人员与最近的下半身肌肉骨骼损伤档案降低跳跃性能?
摘要:Merrigan, JJ, Ray, N, Barrett, K, O'Connor, M, Smith, R, Walters, JR, Hagen, J, Eckerle, J, and Briggs, R。近期下半身肌肉骨骼损伤的现役空军人员的跳跃表现会降低吗?[J] .力量与疾病杂志[J]: 2000 - 2000, 2025-本研究旨在评估最近由于下半身肌肉骨骼损伤或疼痛(LDP)而受到限制的现役空军服役人员的跳跃表现。85名参与者报告了LDP,而719名参与者报告在过去6个月内没有下肢疼痛或肌肉骨骼损伤(no -LDP)。跳跃评估包括3个最大努力臂摆反跳(ASCMJs)、无臂摆反跳(CMJs)、双侧重复跳跃测试(BHT)、带加权背心的CMJs (LCMJ)和落跳(DJ),依次在双力板上进行。LDP组疼痛感和功能受损程度高于无LDP组(p < 0.05)。在ASCMJ期间,LDP(131.07±46.27 N × cm-1)的峰值登陆力大于No-LDP(118.49±43.01 N × cm-1);p = 0.042, ES = -0.089)。LCMJ跳高(LDP = 24.34±6.33;No-LDP = 26.55±7.91 cm;P = 0.040;ES = -0.087),修正反应强度指数(LDP = 24.51±8.59;No-LDP = 27.46±9.85 cm × second-1;P = 0.026;ES = -0.100)较低,而峰值着陆力(LDP = 174.98±56.01;No-LDP = 158.5±55.5 N × cm-1;P = 0.017;ES = 0.101)。DJ时,No-LDP跳高较高(LDP = 25.09±7.09 cm;No-LDP = 27.83±8.73 cm;P = 0.034;ES = -0.091),较低的被动刚度(LDP = 11,822.5±4,865.2 N × m;No-LDP = 10,773.2±6,546.0 N × m;P = 0.034;ES = 0.096),峰值降落力较小(LDP = 3572.3±991.4.4 N;No-LDP = 3282.0±1011.1 N;P = 0.024;Es = 0.105)。在较困难的跳跃任务中,新近患LDP的个体表现出较低的落地能力和较低的跳跃高度。因此,一个全面的评估被鼓励,以帮助通知返回工作时间表,并确保充分的恢复和准备全面的工作。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
9.40%
发文量
384
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: The editorial mission of The Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research (JSCR) is to advance the knowledge about strength and conditioning through research. A unique aspect of this journal is that it includes recommendations for the practical use of research findings. While the journal name identifies strength and conditioning as separate entities, strength is considered a part of conditioning. This journal wishes to promote the publication of peer-reviewed manuscripts which add to our understanding of conditioning and sport through applied exercise science.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信