Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Merrigan, JJ, Ray, N, Barrett, K, O'Connor, M, Smith, R, Walters, JR, Hagen, J, Eckerle, J, and Briggs, R. Do active-duty air force personnel with recent lower-body musculoskeletal injury profiles have reduced jump performances? J Strength Cond Res 39(6): 695-704, 2025-This study aimed to evaluate jump performance in active-duty Air Force service members with recent limited duty profiles because of lower-body musculoskeletal injury or pain (LDP). Eighty-five participants reported LDP, whereas 719 participants reported no lower extremity pain or musculoskeletal injury (No-LDP) within the previous 6 months. Jump assessments consisted of 3 maximal effort arm-swing countermovement jumps (ASCMJs), no arm-swing countermovement jumps (CMJs), bilateral repeated hop test (BHT), CMJs with a weighted vest (LCMJ), and drop jumps (DJ), in that order, on dual force plates. Perceived levels of pain and impaired function were greater in LDP than No-LDP ( p < 0.05). During ASCMJ, LDP (131.07 ± 46.27 N × cm -1 ) had greater peak landing forces than No-LDP (118.49 ± 43.01 N × cm -1 ; p = 0.042, ES = -0.089). For LCMJ, jump height (LDP = 24.34 ± 6.33; No-LDP = 26.55 ± 7.91 cm; p = 0.040; ES = -0.087) and modified reactive strength index (LDP = 24.51 ± 8.59; No-LDP = 27.46 ± 9.85 cm × second -1 ; p = 0.026; ES = -0.100) were lower, whereas peak landing forces (LDP = 174.98 ± 56.01; No-LDP = 158.5 ± 55.5 N × cm -1 ; p = 0.017; ES = 0.101) were greater in LDP than No-LDP. During DJ, No-LDP had higher jump heights (LDP = 25.09 ± 7.09 cm; No-LDP = 27.83 ± 8.73 cm; p = 0.034; ES = -0.091), less passive stiffness (LDP = 11,822.5 ± 4,865.2 N × m; No-LDP = 10,773.2 ± 6,546.0 N × m; p = 0.034; ES = 0.096), and less peak drop landing forces (LDP = 3,572.3 ± 991.4.4 N; No-LDP = 3,282.0 ± 1,011.1 N; p = 0.024; ES = 0.105). Individuals with a recent LDP presented ineffective landing abilities and lower jump heights during more difficult jumping tasks. Therefore, a comprehensive assessment is encouraged to help inform return to duty timelines and ensure adequate recovery and preparedness for full duty.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Merrigan et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: