A Systematic Review of the Different Calculation Methods for Measuring Jump Height During the Countermovement and Drop Jump Tests
Top Cited Papers
Open Access
- 20 March 2023
- journal article
- review article
- Published by Springer Science and Business Media LLC in Sports Medicine
- Vol. 53 (5), 1055-1072
- https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-023-01828-x
Abstract
Background The heights obtained during the countermovement jump and drop jump tests have been measured by numerous studies using different calculation methods and pieces of equipment. However, the differences in calculation methods and equipment used have resulted in discrepancies in jump height being reported. Objectives The aim of this systematic review was to examine the available literature pertaining to the different calculation methods to estimate the jump height during the countermovement jump and drop jump. Methods A systematic review of the literature was undertaken using the SPORTDiscus, MEDLINE, CINAHL, and PubMed electronic databases, with all articles required to meet specified criteria based on a quality scoring system. Results Twenty-one articles met the inclusion criteria, relating various calculation methods and equipment employed when measuring jump height in either of these two tests. The flight time and jump-and-reach methods provide practitioners with jump height data in the shortest time, but their accuracy is affected by factors such as participant conditions or equipment sensitivity. The motion capture systems and the double integration method measure the jump height from the centre of mass height at the initial flat foot standing to the apex of jumping, where the centre of mass displacement generated by the ankle plantarflexion is known. The impulse-momentum and flight time methods could only measure the jump height from the centre of mass height at the instant of take-off to the apex of jumping, thus, providing statistically significantly lower jump height values compared with the former two methods. However, further research is warranted to investigate the reliability of each calculation method when using different equipment settings. Conclusions Our findings indicate that using the impulse-momentum method via a force platform is the most appropriate way for the jump height from the instant of take-off to the apex of jumping to be measured. Alternatively, the double integration method via a force platform is preferred to quantify the jump height from the initial flat foot standing to the apex of jumping.This publication has 60 references indexed in Scilit:
- Validity of vertical jump measurement devicesJournal of Sports Sciences, 2012
- Validity of Two Methods for Estimation of Vertical Jump HeightJournal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 2011
- Validity and reliability of the Newtest Powertimer 300-series® testing systemJournal of Sports Sciences, 2009
- Three Different Methods of Calculating Vertical Jump Height from Force Platform Data in Men and WomenMeasurement in Physical Education and Exercise Science, 2008
- Reliability of the Reactive Strength Index and Time to Stabilization During Depth JumpsJournal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 2008
- Influence of Preactivity and Eccentric Muscle Activity on Concentric Performance during Vertical JumpingJournal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 2008
- Validity of Two Alternative Systems for Measuring Vertical Jump HeightJournal of Strength & Conditioning Research, 2007
- The Validation of a New Method that Measures Contact and Flight Times During Vertical JumpInternational Journal of Sports Medicine, 2004
- Reliability and Factorial Validity of Squat and Countermovement Jump TestsJournal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 2004
- Technical Note: Possible errors in the comparative evaluation of drop jumps from different heightsErgonomics, 1999