Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem
Feasibility of the 2-point method to determine the load velocity relationship variables during the countermovement jump exercise
dc.contributor.author | Pérez Castilla, Alejandro | |
dc.contributor.author | Ramírez Campillo, Rodrigo | |
dc.contributor.author | F.T. Fernandes, John | |
dc.contributor.author | García Ramos, Amador | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2023-09-22T06:36:53Z | |
dc.date.available | 2023-09-22T06:36:53Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2021-11-28 | |
dc.identifier.citation | Pérez-Castilla, A., Ramirez-Campillo, R., Fernandes, J. F., & García-Ramos, A. (2021). Feasibility of the 2-point method to determine the load− velocity relationship variables during the countermovement jump exercise. Journal of Sport and Health Science.[https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jshs.2021.11.003] | es_ES |
dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/10481/84563 | |
dc.description.abstract | Purpose This study aimed to examine the reliability and validity of load−velocity (L–V) relationship variables obtained through the 2-point method using different load combinations and velocity variables. Methods Twenty men performed 2 identical sessions consisting of 2 countermovement jumps against 4 external loads (20 kg, 40 kg, 60 kg, and 80 kg) and a heavy squat against a load linked to a mean velocity (MV) of 0.55 m/s (load0.55). The L–V relationship variables (load-axis intercept (L0), velocity-axis intercept (v0), and area under the L–V relationship line (Aline)) were obtained using 3 velocity variables (MV, mean propulsive velocity (MPV), and peak velocity) by the multiple-point method including (20–40–60–80–load0.55) and excluding (20–40–60–80) the heavy squat, as well as from their respective 2-point methods (20–load0.55 and 20–80). Results The L–V relationship variables were obtained with an acceptable reliability (coefficient of variation (CV) ≤ 7.30%; intra-class correlation coefficient ≥ 0.63). The reliability of L0 and v0 was comparable for both methods (CVratio (calculated as higher value/lower value): 1.11–1.12), but the multiple-point method provided Aline with a greater reliability (CVratio = 1.26). The use of a heavy squat provided the L–V relationship variables with a comparable or higher reliability than the use of a heavy countermovement jump load (CVratio: 1.06–1.19). The peak velocity provided the load–velocity relationship variables with the greatest reliability (CVratio: 1.15–1.86) followed by the MV (CVratio: 1.07–1.18), and finally the MPV. The 2-point methods only revealed an acceptable validity for the MV and MPV (effect size ≤ 0.19; Pearson's product-moment correlation coefficient ≥ 0.96; Lin's concordance correlation coefficient ≥ 0.94). Conclusion The 2-point method obtained from a heavy squat load and MV or MPV is a quick, safe, and reliable procedure to evaluate the lower-body maximal neuromuscular capacities through the L–V relationship. | es_ES |
dc.language.iso | eng | es_ES |
dc.publisher | Elsevier | es_ES |
dc.rights | Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internacional | * |
dc.rights.uri | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ | * |
dc.subject | Force–velocity relationship | es_ES |
dc.subject | Mean velocity | es_ES |
dc.subject | Multiple-point method | es_ES |
dc.subject | Peak velocity | es_ES |
dc.subject | Velocity-based trainingTagedEnd | es_ES |
dc.title | Feasibility of the 2-point method to determine the load velocity relationship variables during the countermovement jump exercise | es_ES |
dc.type | journal article | es_ES |
dc.rights.accessRights | open access | es_ES |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1016/j.jshs.2021.11.003] | |
dc.type.hasVersion | VoR | es_ES |