|
Brief Summary
|
Jumping ability, a key component in Mallakhamb, is influenced by the force-velocity (F-V) profile and lower limb power. Assessing an athlete’s individual F-V profile helps identify force or velocity deficits, optimize neuromuscular performance, and improve training balance. Understanding F–V characteristics in this population may offer critical insights into their neuromuscular development and sport-specific performance capabilities. Biological maturation affects multiple body systems, enhancing neuromuscular function and performance in early-maturing athletes. Identifying gender-specific physical and physiological changes is vital, as post-pubertal differences in strength, power, and coordination contribute to performance variability. Growth and maturation also influence trainability, depending on training timing and type. This study will analyse strengths and weakness across different stages of maturation, improve accuracy of performance assessments and support early talent identification of the Mallakhamb players to foster skill development and strengthen Mallakhamb academies through targeted training Inclusion criteria: competitive mallakhmab players aged 10-18 years, having experience of minimum of 2 years, males and females, regularly trained from professional coach.
Exclusion criteria: participants with any musculoskeletal injury within past 1 year, with any known cardiovascular, pulmonary or neurological diseases and who are irregular at practice.
Baseline Assesments: 1. Force-Velocity Profile using MyJump2 app 2. H:Q Ratio using handheld dynamometer 3. Dynamic Balance using the Lower quadrant Y-balance test (YBT-LQ).
Methodology:
1) Force-velocity profile- At the beginning of the test usual warm up exercises will be given. Then they will be asked to perform the CMJ by placing their hands on their hips, the participants will start a downward movement until they reach the squat position with an angle of approximately 90 degrees at the knees followed by a jump with maximum height (immediately to the CMJ). The landing was performed with both feet simultaneously keeping ankle dorsiflexion. Participants were instructed to jump as high as possible. To record the CMJ with My Jump2 app, the researcher lay prone on the ground with the iPhone facing the participant (in the frontal plane), at approximately 1.5 m from the force platform, and zooming in on the feet of the participant. Two independent observers, with no previous experience on video-analysis were asked to select, with My Jump, the first frame in which both feet were off the ground (takeoff phase) and subsequently, the first frame in which at least one foot was touching the ground (landing phase). Each subject performed a maximum CMJ without additional load, followed by three progressive loading conditions, i.e., there was an increment of 5 kg (body weight, 5 kg, 10 kg, and 15 kg). A 2 min interval was used for the unloaded condition and a 4–5 min interval was allowed between attempts using additional loads. The protocol was considered successfully finished when players achieved 20 cm of jump height with the last load selected, as recommended by previous studies. Each player performed two jumping performance evaluations.
2) Hamstring to Quadriceps strength ratio- The participant is prone with the hip at 0 degrees and knee at 90 degrees, and hands gripping the side of the table, while the clinician assumes a stride stance with the elbows locked in extension to stabilize the handheld dynamometer placed on the participants legs, posterior to the lateral malleolus. Make test was utilised, meaning that the participant volitionally produced as much force as possible during each test. 3 maximal efforts were completed.
3) Lower Quater Y- balance test- The participants performed the Y-balance test in the anterior, posteromedial, and posterolateral directions. The angles between the anterior stripe and both the posterior stripes are 135°, with 90° between the two from the same examiner. The participants will start the test using the dominant leg, followed by the other leg, while maintaining a single-leg stance, and they extended the opposite leg as far as possible in the anterior, posteromedial, and posterolateral directions along a grid. Then, the most distal portion of the reaching foot lightly touched the ground before returning to the starting position. During the test, their hands were positioned at the iliac crest. All experiments were conducted barefoot to eliminate the influence of footwear. After completing three practice trials, participants rested for two minutes before completing three test trials in each direction. In each test session, the order of the reaching directions was randomised. Whenever a participant failed to maintain the unilateral stance, raised or moved the standing foot from the grid, or failed to return the reaching foot to the starting position. The test was dismissed and redone in the same manner. Scores for each direction (anterior, posteromedial, and posterolateral) were calculated by dividing the average reach distance (in cm) by the participant’s leg length (in cm) and multiplying by 100 to get the percentage of the leg length. The patient’s leg length was measured from the most prominent aspect of the anterior superior iliac spine to the distal tip of the ipsilateral medial malleolus. To calculate the composite score, the sum of maximum reaches in each of the 3 directions was divided by 3 times the leg length.
4) Maturity Offset- The subjects were asked to be adequately hydrated and not to have ingested food in the 2 hours before the measurements. For the height measurement, each subject was placed barefoot in front of a tape measure in a vertical position, perfectly positioned from the ground. For the sitting height measurement, a chair without a backrest was placed so that the subject could sit as upright as possible. The subject’s feet had to be suspended in the air or, if this did not occur, the angle formed by the knees had to be greater than 90 degrees. The sitting height was calculated as the distance from the height of the bench to the height reached by the subject. The leg length for maturity offset was calculated as the difference between the total height and the sitting height. All measurements were adjusted to the centimetre. For the maturity offset assessment, the equations of Mirwald et al. (2002) were used And PHV was calculated by- Peak Height Velocity (PHV)= maturity offset – chronological age
|