Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorPedley, Jason
dc.contributor.authorLloyd, Rhodri S.
dc.contributor.authorMoore, Isabel
dc.contributor.authorRead, Paul
dc.contributor.authorDe Ste Croix, Mark
dc.contributor.authorMyer, Greg
dc.contributor.authorOliver, Jon
dc.date.accessioned2020-10-20T10:59:15Z
dc.date.available2020-10-20T10:59:15Z
dc.date.issued2020-11-24
dc.identifier.citationPedley, Jason S, Lloyd, Rhodri S, Read, Paul J, Moore, Isabel S, De Ste Croix, Mark B , Myer, Gregory D. and Oliver, Jon L (2020) 'Utility of kinetic and kinematic jumping and landing variables as predictors of injury risk: a systematic review', Journal of Science in Sport and Exercise https://doi.org/10.1007/s42978-020-00090-1en_US
dc.identifier.issn2096-6709
dc.identifier.issn2662-1371 (online)
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10369/11179
dc.descriptionArticle published in Journal of Science in Sport and Exercise available open access at https://doi.org/10.1007/s42978-020-00090-1en_US
dc.description.abstractPurpose: Jump-landing assessments provide a means to quantify an individual’s ability to attenuate ground reaction forces, generate lower limb explosive power and maintain joint alignment. In order to identify risk factors that can be targeted through appropriate training interventions, it is necessary to establish which (scalar) objective kinetic, kinematic, and performance measures are most associated with lower-extremity injury, Methods: Online searches of MEDLINE, SCOPUS, EBSCOHost, SPORTDiscus and PubMed databases were completed for all articles published before March 2020 in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Results: 40 articles investigating nine jump-landing assessments were included in this review. 79% of studies using drop jump (n =14) observed an association with future injury, while only 8% of countermovement jump studies (n = 13) observed an association with injury risk. 57% of studies using unilateral assessments found associations with risk of injury (n = 14). Studies using performance measures (jump height/ distance) as outcome measure were only associated with injury risk in 30% of cases. However, those using kinetic and/or kinematic analyses (knee abduction moment, knee valgus angle, knee separation distance, peak ground reaction force) found associations with injury in 89% of studies. Conclusion: The landing element of jump-landing assessments appears to be superior for identifying individuals at greater risk of injury; likely due to a closer representation of the injury mechanism. Consequently, jump-landing assessments that involve attenuation of impact forces such as the drop jump appear most suited for this purpose but should involve assessment of frontal plane knee motion and ground reaction forces.en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherSpringeren_US
dc.relation.ispartofseriesJournal of Science in Sport and Exercise;
dc.titleUtility of Kinetic and Kinematic Jumping and Landing Variables as Predictors of Injury Risk: A Systematic Reviewen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.1007/s42978-020-00090-1
dcterms.dateAccepted2020-09-15
rioxxterms.funderCardiff Metropolitan Universityen_US
rioxxterms.identifier.projectCardiff Metropolian (Internal)en_US
rioxxterms.versionVoRen_US
rioxxterms.licenseref.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/en_US
rioxxterms.funder.project37baf166-7129-4cd4-b6a1-507454d1372een_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following collection(s)

Show simple item record