Kinematic comparison between single and double-leg jump landings in sagittal plane for male hand ball players

Volume: 18 Number: 3 December 31, 2016
  • Mariam A. Ameer
EN

Kinematic comparison between single and double-leg jump landings in sagittal plane for male hand ball players

Abstract

Double and single leg jump (SL) landing activities are considered stressful tasks for handball players. Most of the previous researches focused on kinetic analysis of these activities rather than kinematic analysis. Also, there is a lack of comparative studies that were performed between the two types of activities. The main aim of this study is to perform lower extremity kinematic analysis to find the kinematic differences between single and double-leg jump (DL) landings in the sagittal plane (SP),in male handball players. The lower extremity kinematics were measured in 15elite male handball players(while performing SL and DL landings), by using three-dimensional motion analysis system (VICON). The results revealed statistically significant difference between the lower limb kinematics of SPSL and SPDL. During the SPDL, the hip and knee flexion angles increased more than those in SPSL, while there was more knee adduction with internal rotation stress in SPSL than in SPDL(P< .05). The hip and knee flexion angles in the SPDL showed moderate association with those during the SPSL(R2, 0.49 and 0.44 respectively). In addition, the hip abduction in the SPDL showed moderate association with those during the SPSL (R2, 0.37). But, hip internal rotation, knee adduction, and knee internal rotation in the SPDL showed weak association with those during the SPSL (R2 = 0.02-0.041; P ˃ .05).The double-leg jump landing maybe considered as a less stressful task for the lower limb joints than the single-leg jump landing activity. As a clinical benefit, the double-leg jump landing activity may be used to screen the ACL injury risk in certain planes of joint motion.

Keywords

References

  1. Beaulieu ML, Mclean SG. Sex-dimorphic landing mechanics and their role within the noncontact ACL injury mechanism : evidence, limitations and directions. Sports Medicine, Arthroscopy, Rehabilitation, Therapy & Technology, 2012; 4:10.
  2. Breighner RE, Hardy DM, Shultz SJ. Hip extension, knee flexion paradox: A new mechanism for non-contact ACL injury. Journal of Biomechanics, 2011; 44: 577-585.
  3. Cheatham SA, Johnson DL, Cheatham SA, Johnson DL. Current Concepts in ACL Injuries Current Concepts in ACL Injuries. The Physician and Sports Medicine, 2016; 38(3).
  4. Dirx M, Bouter LM, Ma GHDG. A etiology of handball injuries : a case-control study. Br J Sports Med, 1992;26(3): 3–6.
  5. From S, Team F. Mechanisms for noncontact anterior cruciate ligament injuries. The American Journal of Sports Medicine, 2010; 38(11).
  6. Goetschius BJ, Smith HC, Vacek PM, Holterman LA, Sandra J, Tourville TW, et al. Application of a clinic-based algorithm as a tool to identify female athletes at risk for anterior cruciate ligament injury: a prospective cohort study with a nested, matched case-control analysis. American Journal of Sports Medicine, 2012; 40(9): 1978-84.
  7. Harty CM, Dupont CE, Chmielewski TL, Mizner RL. Intertask comparison of frontal plane knee position and moment in female athletes during three distinct movement tasks. Scand J Med Sci Sports, 2011; 98–105.
  8. Hewett TE, Torg JS, Boden BP. Video analysis of trunk and knee motion during non-contact anterior cruciate ligament injury in female athletes: lateral trunk and knee abduction motion are combined components of the injury mechanism A. NIH Public Access, 2014; 43(6): 417–22.

Details

Primary Language

English

Subjects

-

Journal Section

-

Authors

Mariam A. Ameer This is me

Publication Date

December 31, 2016

Submission Date

January 23, 2017

Acceptance Date

-

Published in Issue

Year 2016 Volume: 18 Number: 3

APA
Ameer, M. A. (2016). Kinematic comparison between single and double-leg jump landings in sagittal plane for male hand ball players. Turkish Journal of Sport and Exercise, 18(3), 108-115. https://izlik.org/JA76WH94AD
AMA
1.Ameer MA. Kinematic comparison between single and double-leg jump landings in sagittal plane for male hand ball players. Turk J Sport Exe. 2016;18(3):108-115. https://izlik.org/JA76WH94AD
Chicago
Ameer, Mariam A. 2016. “Kinematic Comparison Between Single and Double-Leg Jump Landings in Sagittal Plane for Male Hand Ball Players”. Turkish Journal of Sport and Exercise 18 (3): 108-15. https://izlik.org/JA76WH94AD.
EndNote
Ameer MA (December 1, 2016) Kinematic comparison between single and double-leg jump landings in sagittal plane for male hand ball players. Turkish Journal of Sport and Exercise 18 3 108–115.
IEEE
[1]M. A. Ameer, “Kinematic comparison between single and double-leg jump landings in sagittal plane for male hand ball players”, Turk J Sport Exe, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 108–115, Dec. 2016, [Online]. Available: https://izlik.org/JA76WH94AD
ISNAD
Ameer, Mariam A. “Kinematic Comparison Between Single and Double-Leg Jump Landings in Sagittal Plane for Male Hand Ball Players”. Turkish Journal of Sport and Exercise 18/3 (December 1, 2016): 108-115. https://izlik.org/JA76WH94AD.
JAMA
1.Ameer MA. Kinematic comparison between single and double-leg jump landings in sagittal plane for male hand ball players. Turk J Sport Exe. 2016;18:108–115.
MLA
Ameer, Mariam A. “Kinematic Comparison Between Single and Double-Leg Jump Landings in Sagittal Plane for Male Hand Ball Players”. Turkish Journal of Sport and Exercise, vol. 18, no. 3, Dec. 2016, pp. 108-15, https://izlik.org/JA76WH94AD.
Vancouver
1.Mariam A. Ameer. Kinematic comparison between single and double-leg jump landings in sagittal plane for male hand ball players. Turk J Sport Exe [Internet]. 2016 Dec. 1;18(3):108-15. Available from: https://izlik.org/JA76WH94AD

Turkish Journal of Sport and Exercise is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY NC).