Journal of exercise science and fitness · 2026
Effects of stiffness-altered compression garments on lower-limb angular kinematics and force-time characteristics in countermovement jumps.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Ho Cheuk Yin, Sum Raymond Kim Wai, Yang Yijian
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Compression garments (CGs) with localized stiffness alterations are marketed to enhance athletic performance, yet evidence for benefits in jumping remains limited. This study aimed to evaluate the effects of stiffness-altered CGs on lower-limb angular kinematics and force-time characteristics in countermovement jumps (CMJs).
METHODS: 62 physically active adults (31 female, 31 male) performed CMJs under four conditions: control (shorts only), knee sleeves with stiffness components, compression leggings without stiffness alterations, and stiffness-altered compression leggings. Sagittal-plane angles were recorded via motion capture, and vertical ground reaction forces via force platforms. Two-way (sex*condition) ANOVA were performed for derived variables, employing both discrete and one-dimensional statistical parametric mapping (SPM) analyses.
RESULTS: Both leggings conditions significantly restricted hip range of motion (81-82° vs. non-leggings 85°, p = 0.001) and peak extension velocity (455-461°/s vs. non-leggings 512°/s, p < 0.001) relative to non-leggings conditions. SPM further revealed phase-specific effects, such as slower hip flexion during early unweighing phase (p < 0.001) in stiffness-altered leggings. Knee and ankle kinematics were not affected. In addition, stiffness-altered leggings reduced countermovement speed (1.37 m/s vs. control 1.43 m/s, p = 0.018) and braking impulse (1.37 N s/kg vs. control 1.43 N s/kg, p = 0.017) but did not impair jumping height (∼0.3 m) and propulsive impulse (∼2.5 N s/kg). No sex-by-condition interactions were observed. No significant differences were found between the two non-leggings conditions, nor between the two leggings conditions.
CONCLUSION: Despite no detectable performance decline, compression leggings primarily restricted hip motion and altered eccentric phase characteristics in CMJs, likely diminishing stretch-shortening cycle efficiency. To promote beneficial effects of stiffness-altered CGs, future study designs shall control for garment fitting via compression and stiffness measurements, as well as individual variations in skill levels via more specific and representative sampling.
METHODS: 62 physically active adults (31 female, 31 male) performed CMJs under four conditions: control (shorts only), knee sleeves with stiffness components, compression leggings without stiffness alterations, and stiffness-altered compression leggings. Sagittal-plane angles were recorded via motion capture, and vertical ground reaction forces via force platforms. Two-way (sex*condition) ANOVA were performed for derived variables, employing both discrete and one-dimensional statistical parametric mapping (SPM) analyses.
RESULTS: Both leggings conditions significantly restricted hip range of motion (81-82° vs. non-leggings 85°, p = 0.001) and peak extension velocity (455-461°/s vs. non-leggings 512°/s, p < 0.001) relative to non-leggings conditions. SPM further revealed phase-specific effects, such as slower hip flexion during early unweighing phase (p < 0.001) in stiffness-altered leggings. Knee and ankle kinematics were not affected. In addition, stiffness-altered leggings reduced countermovement speed (1.37 m/s vs. control 1.43 m/s, p = 0.018) and braking impulse (1.37 N s/kg vs. control 1.43 N s/kg, p = 0.017) but did not impair jumping height (∼0.3 m) and propulsive impulse (∼2.5 N s/kg). No sex-by-condition interactions were observed. No significant differences were found between the two non-leggings conditions, nor between the two leggings conditions.
CONCLUSION: Despite no detectable performance decline, compression leggings primarily restricted hip motion and altered eccentric phase characteristics in CMJs, likely diminishing stretch-shortening cycle efficiency. To promote beneficial effects of stiffness-altered CGs, future study designs shall control for garment fitting via compression and stiffness measurements, as well as individual variations in skill levels via more specific and representative sampling.