4.4 Article

PEAK VERTICAL JUMP POWER ESTIMATIONS IN YOUTHS AND YOUNG ADULTS

Journal

JOURNAL OF STRENGTH AND CONDITIONING RESEARCH
Volume 26, Issue 7, Pages 1749-1755

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e3182576f1e

Keywords

American football; kinetics; muscle; soccer; sport

Categories

Funding

  1. California State University, Fullerton

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Amonette, WE, Brown, LE, De Witt, JK, Dupler, TL, Tran, TT, Tufano, JJ, and Spiering, BA. Peak vertical jump power estimations in youths and young adults. J Strength Cond Res 26(7): 1749-1755, 2012-The purpose of this study was to develop and validate a regression equation to estimate peak power (PP) using a large sample of athletic youths and young adults. Anthropometric and vertical jump ground reaction forces were collected from 460 male volunteers (age: 12-24 years). Of these 460 volunteers, a stratified random sample of 45 subjects representing 3 different age groups (12-15 years [n = 15], 16-18 years [n = 15], and 19-24 years [n = 15]) was selected as a validation sample. Data from the remaining 415 subjects were used to develop a new equation (Novel) to estimate PP using age, body mass (BM), and vertical jump height (VJH) via backward step-wise regression. Independently, age (r = 0.57), BM (r = 0.83), and VJ (r = 0.65) were significantly (p < 0.05) correlated with PP. However, age did not significantly (p = 0.53) contribute to the final prediction equation (Novel): PP (watts) = 63.6 x VJH (centimeters) + 42.7 x BM (kilograms) - 1,846.5 (r = 0.96; standard error of the estimate = 250.7 W). For each age group, there were no differences between actual PP (overall group mean +/- SD: 3,244 +/- 991 W) and PP estimated using Novel (3,253 +/- 1,037 W). Conversely, other previously published equations produced PP estimates that were significantly different than actual PP. The large sample size used in this study (n = 415) likely explains the greater accuracy of the reported Novel equation compared with previously developed equations (n = 17-161). Although this Novel equation can accurately estimate PP values for a group of subjects, between-subject comparisons estimating PP using Novel or any other previously published equations should be interpreted with caution because of large intersubject error (+/- >600 W) associated with predictions.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available