Concurrent Validity of Vertical Jump Performance Assessment Systems

Abstract

The aim of this study was to examine the concurrent validity of 2 portable systems for vertical jump (VJ) assessment under field conditions. The VJ flight times assessed using an optical mat (Optojump) and an accelerometer-based (Myotest) system were compared with that of a force platform. The flight times recorded during a countermovement jump (CMJ) were collected from 20 rugby players (n = 86 jumps) concurrently using the 3 tracking systems. Significant bias between the Force platform and either the Optojump (bias = 0.006 ± 0.007; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.004-0.007 seconds) and Myotest (bias = -0.031 ± 0.021; 95% CI 0.035 to -0.026s; p < 0.0001) occurred. A nearly perfect correlation was found between force platform and Optojump (r = 0.99; 95% CI 0.098-0.99; p < 0.0001). Force platform and Myotest (r = 0.89; 95% CI 0.084-0.93; p < 0.0001) flight times showed very large association. Difference between Optojump and Myotest systems was significant (-0.036 ± 0.021 seconds; 95% CI -0.041 to -0.032; p < 0.0001), which results in Myotest mean flight time being approximately 7.2% longer than the Optojump flight time. The association between Optojump and Myotest was nearly perfect (r = 0.91, 95% CI 0.86-0.94; p < 0.0001). This study showed that the Optojump and Myotest systems possess convergent validity and can be successfully used under field conditions to assess VJ while performing a CMJ. However, caution should be exercised when interpreting data obtained from different portable systems for field measurement.

The influence of explosive power on the performance of an elite swimmer in 25 and 50 metre pools

“…Jump height was measured by a Myotest device (Myotest, Sion, Switzerland), which is based on 3D acceleration, is designed for commercial use, and is worn at the waist. The validity and reliability of the Myotest device have been recently verified (Casartelli, Muller, & Maffiuletti, 2010;Castagna, 2013;Comstock et al, 2011;Dinu et al, 2011;Gindre et al, 2016;Houel, Faury, & Seyfried, 2013;Choukou, Laffaye, & Taiar, 2013).…”

Validation of a force platform clinical for the assessment of vertical jump height

“…In the present study the COBS Feedback® method has been validated for a precision in the flight time record of 250Hz (i.e., 1 datum every four ms). This is an inherent limitation to determine the flight time of this method, considering whereas the theoretical precision of other devices (i.e., Optojump system) is very high (e.g., 1.8 mm with a sampling frequency of 1000 Hz) (Castagna et al, 2013;Glatthorn et al, 2011). According to Kibele (1998), an error of 5 to 10 ms is acceptable in determining the start of the jump without substantially affecting the integration calculations, but errors larger than 2 to 3 ms in determining the toff greatly affect the speed (Vz) and displacement of the center of mass.…”

Backwards overhead medicine ball throw and countermovement jump performance among firefighter candidates

“…The validity and reliability of the Myotest in assessing CMJ performance has been previously established in the literature. 13,14 Each subject performed 2 test CMJ trials, separated by 30 seconds of rest between each trial, according to previously established protocol. 15 Researchers did not control for depth of the countermovement, each subject was instructed to jump as high as possible, and positive verbal encouragement was given.…”