The effects of single and combined jump exercises utilizing fast and slow stretch-shortening cycle on physical fitness measures in healthy adult males: A randomized controlled trial
Rohit K. Thapa,Utsav Chaware,Bhargav Sarmah,José Afonso,Jason Moran,Helmi Chaabene,Rodrigo Ramirez-Campillo,University of Guilan, Faculty of Sport Sciences, Department of Exercise Physiology, Rasht, Iran,Roudbar Branch, Islamic Azad University, Roudbar, Iran,School of Physical Education and Sports, Rashtriya Raksha University, Gandhinagar 382305, India,School of Physical Education and Sports, Rashtriya Raksha University, Gandhinagar 382305, India,Centre for Research, Education, Innovation, and Intervention in Sport (CIFI2D), Faculty of Sport of the University of Porto, Rua Dr. Plácido Costa, 91, 4200-450 Porto, Portugal,School of Sport, Rehabilitation and Exercise Sciences, University of Essex, Colchester, Essex CO43SQ, United Kingdom,Division of Training and Movement Sciences, Research Focus Cognition Sciences, University of Potsdam, Am Neuen Palais 10, Building 12, 14469 Potsdam, Germany,High Institute of Sports and Physical Education of Kef, University of Jendouba, Kef 7100. Tunisia,Exercise and Rehabilitation Sciences Institute, School of Physical Therapy, Faculty of Rehabilitation Sciences, Universidad Andres Bello, Santiago 7591538 Chile
DOI: https://doi.org/10.26773/mjssm.240308
2024-03-20
Montenegrin Journal of Sports Science and Medicine
Abstract:This study aimed to compare the effects of six-week volume-equated jump training using drop jump (DJ), countermovement jump (CMJ), or a combination of both (COMB) on the physical fitness of adult males. Participants were randomly assigned to DJ (n=10), CMJ (n=9), or COMB (n=10) training groups or an active control group (n=7). Performance data were collected for 10-m and 30-m sprint, DJ, CMJ, standing long jump (SLJ), triple-hop jump, change of direction speed (CODS), and maximal isometric strength. The DJ demonstrated improvements in the 10-m sprint, CMJ, and SLJ (g=0.62–1.13, %Δ=3.0–10.8). The CMJ group improved in the 10-m and 30-m sprints, CODS, CMJ and SLJ (g=0.34–1.17, %Δ=3.4–10.5). The COMB group displayed progress in CMJ and SLJ (g=0.46–0.61, %Δ=6.4–8.6). In comparison to the control and COMB groups, the DJ and CMJ groups improved the 10-m sprint (p=0.008, ηp2=0.311), and in comparison to the control group, the CMJ group improved SLJ (p=0.037, ηp2=0.220). To conclude, the findings presented here deviate from the training principle of specificity, particularly in relation to ground contact time. This suggests that the classification of jump exercises into fast- and slow-SSC categories based solely on ground contact time might oversimplify a more intricate phenomenon.