Fatigue influences lower extremity angular velocities during a single-leg drop vertical jump

Abstract

[Purpose] Fatigue alters lower extremity landing strategies and decreases the ability to attenuate impact during landing. The purpose of this study was to reveal the influence of fatigue on dynamic alignment and joint angular velocities in the lower extremities during a single leg landing. [Subjects and Methods] The 34 female college students were randomly assigned to either the fatigue or control group. The fatigue group performed single-leg drop vertical jumps before, and after, the fatigue protocol, which was performed using a bike ergometer. Lower extremity kinematic data were acquired using a three-dimensional motion analysis system. The ratio of each variable (%), for the pre-fatigue to post-fatigue protocols, were calculated to compare differences between each group. [Results] Peak hip and knee flexion angular velocities increased significantly in the fatigue group compared with the control group. Furthermore, hip flexion angular velocity increased significantly between each group at 40 milliseconds after initial ground contact. [Conclusion] Fatigue reduced the ability to attenuate impact by increasing angular velocities in the direction of hip and knee flexion during landings. These findings indicate a requirement to evaluate movement quality over time by measuring hip and knee flexion angular velocities in landings during fatigue conditions.

Revised Approach to the Role of Fatigue in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury Prevention: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analyses

“…speed (5–8 mph), incr. grade with 2.5% every 2 min (C)5 jumps, fatigue protocol, 5 jumpsUntil ‘subject could not run anymore at maximum effort’Knee FLEX/EXT angle IC and peakHip IR/ER angle IC and peakKnee ABD/ADD angle IC and peak Tamura et al, 2016 [38]34 F (20.7 ± 1.8)NANASingle-leg drop vertical jump (A)Testing sequence was shown by an assistant researcherBike ergometer 100W 5 min (C)5 single-leg drop vertical jumps, fatigue protocol, 5 single-leg drop vertical jumpsUntil exceeding 17 on Borg scaleKnee FLEX/EXT angle peak Lessi et al, 2017 [39]20 M (22.8 ± 2.9)Anyone participating in aerobic or athletic activityRecreational (i.e., at least three times a week)Single-leg drop vertical jump (A)Instructed to hold arms across their chest, step off box without jumping up, stepping down or losing balance, and land with the dominant limb + no verbal or visual clues were given for the landing techniques at any time10 bilateral squats (90 knee flexion), 2 bilateral max effort vertical jumps and 20 steps (31-cm-high stair) (C)3 single-leg drop vertical jumps, fatigue protocol, 3 single-leg drop vertical jumpsUntil hop distance was reduced at least by 20%Hip, knee FLEX/EXT, ABD/ADD angle IC, and peak Tamura et al, 2017 [40]34 F (20.7 ± 1.8)NANASingle-leg drop vertical jump (A)Testing sequence was shown by an assistant researcherBike ergometer 100W 5 min (C)5 single-leg drop vertical jumps, fatigue protocol, 5 single-leg drop vertical jumpsUntil exceeding 17 on Borg scaleHip, knee, ankle FLEX/EXT angle peak, IC, 40 ms after IC, at vGRFSingle-leg drop landing Madigan et al, 2003 [42]12 M (27.9 ± 5.4)Subjects who were physically activeRecreationalSingle-leg drop landing (A)Instructed to land on a visual target placed 33 cm from the front edge of the elevated platform using a toe-to-heel strategySingle-leg squats (C)Single-leg drop landing, 2 single-leg squats, single-leg drop landing, until fatiguedUntil subjects felt their right knee would collapse upon the next landingvGRF peak, impulse and ...…”

“…2 ), of which two studies were excluded from the meta-analyses, as not enough data samples were available from these studies [ 34 , 35 ]. The four types of single-leg tasks in this review were: (1) single-leg drop vertical jump (SLDVJ, n = 5 studies) [ 36 – 40 ], (2) single-leg drop landing (SLDL, n = 8 studies) [ 41 – 48 ], (3) single-leg hop for distance (SLHD, n = 3 studies) [ 34 , 49 , 50 ], and (4) sidestep cutting (SSC, n = 4 studies) [ 35 , 51 – 53 ].

Fig.

…”

“…Fifteen studies conducted central fatigue protocols [ 35 – 43 , 45 , 48 , 49 , 51 , 52 , 54 ] and five studies conducted peripheral fatigue protocols [ 34 , 44 , 46 , 47 , 50 ]. Six studies included both female and male subjects [ 37 , 41 , 43 , 44 , 48 , 50 ], nine studies included only female subjects [ 35 , 38 , 40 , 45 – 47 , 51 , 52 , 54 ], and five studies included only male subjects [ 34 , 36 , 39 , 42 , 49 ]. The average age of included subjects was 24.89 ± 4.26 years and 20.68 ± 1.35 years for male and female subjects, respectively.…”

“…The overall quality score ranged from 12 to 17 (maximum 21). Most studies were level 4 studies, but two studies were level 1 [ 38 , 40 ]. This was mainly because they included a control group and assigned subjects to the groups randomly.…”

Implicaciones de la clasificación del equilibrio dinámico en jugadoras de fútbol para variables funcionales. Estudio clínico de intervención.

“…Los resultados del presente estudio deben ser tratados con precaución porque el cálculo del tamaño muestral no fue calculado, sin embargo, estudios similares ya publicados tienen tamaños muestrales similares (De Ste Croix et al, 2016;Lehnert et al, 2016). Otra limitación es que no se realizó la prueba del SCCP de manera monopodal ya descrito en la literatura (Taylor et al, 2016;Tamura et al, 2017), donde se hubiera podido relacionar la fuerza dinámica de cada pierna. Para futuras investigaciones esta valoración puede mostrar datos interesantes en aspectos funcionales del rendimiento.…”