Physical therapy in sport : official journal of the Association of Chartered Physiotherapists in Sports Medicine · 2022
Effect of an overhead goal on landing error scoring system and jump height measures.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание 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.
Hébert-Losier Kim, Boswell-Smith Caleb, Hanzlíková Ivana
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: Compare overall Landing Error Scoring System (LESS) scores, risk categorisation, specific LESS errors, and double-leg jump-landing jump heights between overhead goal and no goal conditions.
DESIGN: Randomised cross-over.
SETTING: Laboratory.
PARTICIPANTS: 76 (51% male).
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Participants landed from a 30-cm box to 50% of their body height and immediately jumped vertically for maximum height. Participants completed three trials under two random-ordered conditions: with and without overhead goal. Group-level mean LESS scores, risk categorisation (5-error threshold), specific landing errors, and jump heights were compared between conditions.
RESULTS: Mean LESS scores were greater (0.3 errors, p < 0.001) with the overhead goal, but this small difference was not clinically meaningful. Similarly, although the number of high-risk participants was greater with the overhead goal (p = 0.039), the 9.2% difference was trivial. Participants jumped 2.7 cm higher with the overhead goal (p < 0.001) without affecting the occurrence of any specific LESS errors.
DISCUSSION: Performing the LESS with an overhead goal enhances sport specificity and elicits greater vertical jump performances with minimal change in landing errors and injury-risk categorisation. Adding an overhead goal to LESS might enhance its suitability for injury risk screening, although the predictive value of LESS with an overhead goal needs confirmation.
DESIGN: Randomised cross-over.
SETTING: Laboratory.
PARTICIPANTS: 76 (51% male).
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Participants landed from a 30-cm box to 50% of their body height and immediately jumped vertically for maximum height. Participants completed three trials under two random-ordered conditions: with and without overhead goal. Group-level mean LESS scores, risk categorisation (5-error threshold), specific landing errors, and jump heights were compared between conditions.
RESULTS: Mean LESS scores were greater (0.3 errors, p < 0.001) with the overhead goal, but this small difference was not clinically meaningful. Similarly, although the number of high-risk participants was greater with the overhead goal (p = 0.039), the 9.2% difference was trivial. Participants jumped 2.7 cm higher with the overhead goal (p < 0.001) without affecting the occurrence of any specific LESS errors.
DISCUSSION: Performing the LESS with an overhead goal enhances sport specificity and elicits greater vertical jump performances with minimal change in landing errors and injury-risk categorisation. Adding an overhead goal to LESS might enhance its suitability for injury risk screening, although the predictive value of LESS with an overhead goal needs confirmation.