The assessment of single-leg drop jump landing performance by means of ground reaction forces: A methodological study

• Published in: Gait & posture Vol. 73; pp. 80 - 85
• Main Authors: Huurnink, Arnold, Fransz, Duncan P., Kingma, Idsart, de Boode, Vosse A., Dieën, Jaap H. van
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: England Elsevier B.V 01.09.2019
• Subjects: Adolescent; Adult; Balance; Child; Drop jump landing; Dynamic testing; Exercise; Female; Gait - physiology; Humans; Leg - physiology; Male; Movement - physiology; Parameters; Postural Balance - physiology; Postural stability; Soccer; Young Adult; Dynamic testing; Parameters; Drop jump landing; Balance; Postural stability
• ISSN: 0966-6362; 1879-2219
• DOI: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2019.06.015

•Time to stabilization (TTS) is unrelated to dynamic postural stability index (DPSI).•TTS is related to horizontal forces during dynamic time periods.•DPSI is only related to peak landing forces, not to stabilizing forces.•TTS was moderately related to static balance, while DPSI was not.•Findings show differential meaning of jump landing performance measures. Time to stabilization (TTS) and dynamic postural stability index (DPSI) are outcome measures based on ground reaction force (GRF) that are often used to quantify dynamic postural stability performance following a drop jump landing. However, their interrelations, as well as the overlap with other dynamic measures and static single-leg postural sway, are unknown. What is the relation among TTS and DPSI, how are they related to impact forces and dynamic postural sway, and how are all these dynamic measures related to static postural sway? A sample of 190 elite soccer players performed four single-leg drop jump landings. TTS in three directions (vertical, anteroposterior, and mediolateral), and DPSI were intercorrelated (Pearson’s r), and related to impact forces and the magnitude of horizontal GRF (HGRF) from 0.4 to 2.4 s and 3.0–5.0 s following landing. All these measures were also correlated to HGRF in the static phase (i.e., 5.3–11.7 s). The TTS measures were significantly interrelated (r = 0.28-0.53), but were not significantly correlated to DPSI. TTS was more strongly related to HGRF0.4–2.4 s (r = 0.54-0.75) than to HGRF3.0–5.0 s (r = 0.32-0.54) or impact forces (r=-0.28-0.36). Vertical TTS was not significantly related to impact forces. The DPSI was most strongly related to the vertical peak force (r = 0.85), and was not significantly related to HGRF of the dynamic periods. Furthermore, TTS and dynamic HGRF were significantly related to static HGRF (r = 0.34-0.80), while DPSI and impact forces were not. TTS and DPSI do not represent similar aspects of single-leg jump landing performance. The ability to stabilize posture seems to be represented by TTS and dynamic postural sway, which partly overlaps with static postural sway. In contrast, DPSI and vertical peak force mainly reflect the kinetic energy absorption during impact. The findings can help to better understand the meaning of the outcome measures, and to translate results to rehabilitation or prevention programs.