Reliability of unipodal and bipodal counter movement jump landings in a recreational male population

Abstract

Movement patterns during landing have been suggested to be related to injury risk. The purpose of this study was to determine the inter-session reliability of kinematic variables and ground reaction forces during landing in a population of male recreational athletes after a counter movement jump. Both unipodal and bipodal landings were evaluated. Furthermore, the possibility to improve landing reliability with a verbal instruction was also studied. Twenty-four male volunteers with no history of lower extremity trauma were randomly assigned to two groups (with and without verbal landing instruction). An optoelectronic 3D system and force plates were used to measure the lower limb joint angles and the ground reaction forces during landing. Intraclass correlation values show moderate to excellent inter-session reliability for the bipodal task (ICC average: 0.80, range: 0.46–0.97) and poor to excellent reliability for the unipodal task (ICC average: >0.75, range: 0.20–0.95). However, large standard errors of measurement values at the ankle joint at impact (27.6 ± 11.5°) and for the vertical ground reaction forces (394 ± 1091 N) show that some variables may not be usable in practice. The verbal instruction had a negative effect on the reliability of unipodal landing but improved the reliability of bipodal landing. These findings show that the reliability of a landing task is influenced by its motor complexity as well as the instruction given to the subject.

Keywords:

• Biomechanics
• lower limb
• kinematics
• ground reaction forces
• verbal instruction

Acknowledgements

The authors also thank the two anonymous reviewers for their extensive review and the improvements they brought to this manuscript.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Supplementary data

Supplemental data for this article can be accessed here https://doi.org/10.1080/17461391.2017.1353134.

Additional information

Funding

This work was partly supported by the Fédération Wallonie-Bruxelles (Belgium).