着陆方式在不增加受伤风险的情况下影响反应强度指数。

Dana Guy-Cherry, Ahmad Alanazi, Lauren Miller, Darrin Staloch, Alexis Ortiz-Rodriguez
{"title":"着陆方式在不增加受伤风险的情况下影响反应强度指数。","authors":"Dana Guy-Cherry,&nbsp;Ahmad Alanazi,&nbsp;Lauren Miller,&nbsp;Darrin Staloch,&nbsp;Alexis Ortiz-Rodriguez","doi":"10.1055/a-0608-4280","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The aim was to determine which three landing styles - stiff (ST), self-selected (SS), or soft (SF) - exhibit safer landing mechanics and greater jumping performance. Thirty participants (age: 26.5±5.1 years; height: 171.0±8.8 cm; weight: 69.7±10.1 kg) performed five trials of three randomized drop jump (40 cm) landing styles including SF (~60° knee flexion), ST (knees as straight as possible), and SS. Knee flexion and valgus angles and kinetics were measured. An electromyography system measured muscle activity of the gluteus maximus, quadriceps, hamstrings, tibialis anterior, and gastrocnemius. Reactive strength index (RSI) was used to measure jumping performance. ANOVAs were used to compare the three landings. All landings differed in knee flexion (p<0.001; effect size (η <sup>2</sup> ): 0.9) but not valgus (p=.13; η <sup>2</sup> :.15). RSI (mm·ms <sup>-1</sup> ) showed differences for all jumps (p<0.001; η <sup>2</sup> : 0.7) with SS (0.96) showing the highest value, then ST (0.93), and SF (0.64). Ground reaction forces were different between jumps (p<0.001; η <sup>2</sup> : 0.4) with SF (1.34/bodyweight (bw)) showing lower forces, then SS (1.50/bw), and ST (1.81/bw). No between-jump differences were observed for EMG (p>0.66; η <sup>2</sup> : 0.3). No landing demonstrated valgus landing mechanics. The SS landing exhibited the highest RSI. However, the 1.8/bw exhibited by the ST landing might contribute to overload of musculotendinous structures at the knee.</p>","PeriodicalId":74857,"journal":{"name":"Sports medicine international open","volume":"2 2","pages":"E35-E40"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-05-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1055/a-0608-4280","citationCount":"8","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Landing Styles Influences Reactive Strength Index without Increasing Risk for Injury.\",\"authors\":\"Dana Guy-Cherry,&nbsp;Ahmad Alanazi,&nbsp;Lauren Miller,&nbsp;Darrin Staloch,&nbsp;Alexis Ortiz-Rodriguez\",\"doi\":\"10.1055/a-0608-4280\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The aim was to determine which three landing styles - stiff (ST), self-selected (SS), or soft (SF) - exhibit safer landing mechanics and greater jumping performance. Thirty participants (age: 26.5±5.1 years; height: 171.0±8.8 cm; weight: 69.7±10.1 kg) performed five trials of three randomized drop jump (40 cm) landing styles including SF (~60° knee flexion), ST (knees as straight as possible), and SS. Knee flexion and valgus angles and kinetics were measured. An electromyography system measured muscle activity of the gluteus maximus, quadriceps, hamstrings, tibialis anterior, and gastrocnemius. Reactive strength index (RSI) was used to measure jumping performance. ANOVAs were used to compare the three landings. All landings differed in knee flexion (p<0.001; effect size (η <sup>2</sup> ): 0.9) but not valgus (p=.13; η <sup>2</sup> :.15). RSI (mm·ms <sup>-1</sup> ) showed differences for all jumps (p<0.001; η <sup>2</sup> : 0.7) with SS (0.96) showing the highest value, then ST (0.93), and SF (0.64). Ground reaction forces were different between jumps (p<0.001; η <sup>2</sup> : 0.4) with SF (1.34/bodyweight (bw)) showing lower forces, then SS (1.50/bw), and ST (1.81/bw). No between-jump differences were observed for EMG (p>0.66; η <sup>2</sup> : 0.3). No landing demonstrated valgus landing mechanics. The SS landing exhibited the highest RSI. However, the 1.8/bw exhibited by the ST landing might contribute to overload of musculotendinous structures at the knee.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":74857,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Sports medicine international open\",\"volume\":\"2 2\",\"pages\":\"E35-E40\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-05-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1055/a-0608-4280\",\"citationCount\":\"8\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Sports medicine international open\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-0608-4280\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sports medicine international open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-0608-4280","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

摘要

目的是确定哪三种着陆方式——硬着陆(ST)、自选着陆(SS)或软着陆(SF)——表现出更安全的着陆机制和更高的跳跃性能。30名参与者(年龄:26.5±5.1岁;身高:171.0±8.8 厘米重量:69.7±10.1 kg)进行了五次试验,包括三次随机跳跃(40 cm)着地方式,包括SF(约60°膝关节屈曲)、ST(膝盖尽可能直)和SS。测量膝关节屈曲和外翻角度以及动力学。肌电图系统测量了臀大肌、股四头肌、腘绳肌、胫骨前肌和腓肠肌的肌肉活动。反应强度指数(RSI)被用来衡量跳跃表现。方差分析用于比较三次着陆。所有着陆的膝关节屈曲(p2):0.9)不同,但外翻(p=.13;η2:.15)不同。RSI(mm·ms-1)显示所有跳跃的差异(p2:0.7),SS(0.96)显示最高值,然后是ST(0.93)和SF(0.64)。跳跃之间的地面反作用力不同(p2:0.4),SF(1.34体重(bw))显示较低作用力,然后是SS(1.50/bw),和ST(1.81/bw)。EMG在跳跃之间没有观察到差异(p>0.05;η2:0.3)。没有落地显示外翻落地机制。SS着陆表现出最高的RSI。然而,ST段着地所表现出的1.8/bw可能会导致膝盖肌肉腱结构过载。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Landing Styles Influences Reactive Strength Index without Increasing Risk for Injury.

Landing Styles Influences Reactive Strength Index without Increasing Risk for Injury.

The aim was to determine which three landing styles - stiff (ST), self-selected (SS), or soft (SF) - exhibit safer landing mechanics and greater jumping performance. Thirty participants (age: 26.5±5.1 years; height: 171.0±8.8 cm; weight: 69.7±10.1 kg) performed five trials of three randomized drop jump (40 cm) landing styles including SF (~60° knee flexion), ST (knees as straight as possible), and SS. Knee flexion and valgus angles and kinetics were measured. An electromyography system measured muscle activity of the gluteus maximus, quadriceps, hamstrings, tibialis anterior, and gastrocnemius. Reactive strength index (RSI) was used to measure jumping performance. ANOVAs were used to compare the three landings. All landings differed in knee flexion (p<0.001; effect size (η 2 ): 0.9) but not valgus (p=.13; η 2 :.15). RSI (mm·ms -1 ) showed differences for all jumps (p<0.001; η 2 : 0.7) with SS (0.96) showing the highest value, then ST (0.93), and SF (0.64). Ground reaction forces were different between jumps (p<0.001; η 2 : 0.4) with SF (1.34/bodyweight (bw)) showing lower forces, then SS (1.50/bw), and ST (1.81/bw). No between-jump differences were observed for EMG (p>0.66; η 2 : 0.3). No landing demonstrated valgus landing mechanics. The SS landing exhibited the highest RSI. However, the 1.8/bw exhibited by the ST landing might contribute to overload of musculotendinous structures at the knee.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信