4.0 Article

The Effect of Jump-Landing Directions on Dynamic Stability

期刊

JOURNAL OF APPLIED BIOMECHANICS
卷 29, 期 5, 页码 634-638

出版社

HUMAN KINETICS PUBL INC
DOI: 10.1123/jab.29.5.634

关键词

time to stabilization; ground reaction force; multidirectional jumps; landing

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Dynamic stability is often measured by time to stabilization (TTS), which is calculated from the dwindling fluctuations of ground reaction force (GRF) components over time. Common protocols of dynamic stability research have involved forward or vertical jumps, neglecting different jump-landing directions. Therefore, the purpose of the present investigation was to examine the influence of different jump-landing directions on TTS. Twenty healthy participants (9 male, 11 female; age = 28 +/- 4 y; body mass = 73.3 +/- 21.5 kg; body height = 173.4 +/- 10.5 cm) completed the Multi-Directional Dynamic Stability Protocol hopping tasks from four different directions-forward, lateral, medial, and backward-landing single-legged onto the force plate. TTS was calculated for each component of the GRF (ap = anterior-posterior; ml = medial-lateral; v = vertical) and was based on a sequential averaging technique. All TTS measures showed a statistically significant main effect for jump-landing direction. TTSml showed significantly longer times for landings from the medial and lateral directions (medial: 4.10 +/- 0.21 s, lateral: 4.24 +/- 0.15 s, forward: 1.48 +/- 0.59 s, backward: 1.42 +/- 0.37 s), whereas TTSap showed significantly longer times for landings from the forward and backward directions (forward: 4.53 +/- 0.17 s, backward: 4.34 +/- 0.35 s, medial: 1.18 +/- 0.49 s, lateral: 1.11 +/- 0.43 s). TTSv showed a significantly shorter time for the forward direction compared with all other landing directions (forward: 2.62 +/- 0.31 s, backward: 2.82 +/- 0.29 s, medial: 2.91 +/- 0.31 s, lateral: 2.86 +/- 0.32 s). Based on these results, multiple jump-landing directions should be considered when assessing dynamic stability.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.0
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据