ABSTRACT
Jump tests are simple, quick to execute, and considered the most reliable tool to measure lower extremities power and explosiveness in athletes. Wearable inertial sensors allow the assessment of jumping performance on any surface. The validity of inertial sensors measurements is a pivotal prerequisite to reliably implement their utilization in the clinical practice. Twenty-seven athletes (20 M/7 F, age: 27 ± 7 years old) performed five double-leg countermovement jumps (CMJs) and three single-leg CMJs per side with their hands on their hips. Jump height was measured/computed simultaneously with the optoelectronic system, force platforms, and the Baiobit inertial sensor system. The athletes completed the international physical activity questionnaire (IPAQ). When comparing the methods (Baiobit vs. force platforms), a non-statistically significant bias of 1.8 cm was found for two-leg CMJs and -0.6 cm for single-leg CMJs. The intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) was "excellent" for double-leg CMJs (ICC = 0.92, 95% CI = 0.89-0.94) and "good" for single-leg CMJs (ICC = 0.89, 95% CI = 0.85-0.91). When comparing the methods (Baiobit vs. force platforms + optoelectronic system), a non-statistically significant bias of -0.9 cm was found for two-leg CMJs and -1.2 cm for single-leg CMJs. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was "good" for both double-leg CMJs (ICC = 0.80, 95% CI = 0.73-0.85) and for single-leg CMJs (ICC = 0.86, 95% CI = 0.80-0.89). Baiobit tends to overestimate double- and single-leg CMJ height measurements; however, it can be recommended in the world of rehabilitation and sport analysis.
