Which jump-landing task best represents lower extremity and trunk kinematics of unanticipated cutting maneuver?

Abstract

Background
The double-leg jump-landing (DLJL) task is commonly used as a movement screen that can be implemented in large cohorts of athletes. However, it is debatable whether the DLJL is ecologically valid and reflects sporting requirements or injury-prone situations, such as cutting and pivoting.

Research question
Which jump-landing movement variation best represents the kinematics of unanticipated side-step cutting?

Methods
Forty-two participants (25 males and 17 females) performed unanticipated side-step cutting and four jump-landing tasks: DLJL, rotated DLJL (DLJLrot), single-leg jump-landing (SLJL), and rotated SLJL (SLJLrot). Ankle, knee, hip, pelvis, and trunk angles and angular velocities, and pelvic linear accelerations were collected at initial contact and during the first 100 milliseconds after initial contact (minimum, maximum, and range values) using a three-dimensional infrared camera system and inertial measurement units. Pre-contact foot-ground angles and subjective task difficulty ratings were also recorded. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) between cutting and jump-landing kinematics were calculated for each participant and jump-landing variation. Friedman tests with pairwise comparisons were then used to compare the degree of association between the four different jump-landing tasks at the specified time events and to compare the difficulty ratings.

Results
Considering the ICC values across the events of interest, the kinematics of the DLJL were the least associated with those of cutting (ICC = 0.00 to 0.81), and DLJLrot (ICC = 0.34 to 0.81) and SLJLrot (ICC = 0.31 to 0.80) biomechanics the most. Participants rated the perceived challenge of the single-leg tasks in a similar manner to cutting (p >  0.103), and the SLJLrot as the most difficult task (median = “neutral”, mode = “neutral”).

Significance
Due to their biomechanical associations with cutting maneuver and subjectively-rated difficulty levels, both DLJLrot and SLJLrot may be more appropriate and ecologically valid for screening for risk of injury across a range of sports.