Comparison of Female Collegiate Athletes and College Age Cohort in Tuck Jump Assessment.

Smith, CA, Olson, BK, Olson, LA, Chimera, NJ, and Warren, M. Comparison of female collegiate athletes and college age cohort in tuck jump assessment. J Strength Cond Res 31(4): 1048-1054, 2017-The tuck jump assessment (TJA) is a plyometric jumping assessment with 10 flaw criteria against which technique is assessed over a 10-second interval. The TJA has been reported as a tool for identifying neuromuscular deficits that increase risk for anterior cruciate ligament injury, but group specific data on female TJA scores are limited. No cut point has been developed for groups with different activity levels or participation in athletics. This study investigated the association between TJA score and athletic participation in college-aged females. One hundred twenty-one females (53 collegiate athletes and 68 college students) completed the TJA. TJA score was the sum of flaws for the 10 criteria observed, and the number of jumps was recorded. Poisson regression was used to assess the association between TJA score and number of jumps. The association between each of the 10 flaws between groups was assessed with the chi-square test. No significant association was found between groups for TJA score (mean ± SD: 4.66 ± 1.07 athletes; 5.45 ± 1.05 college cohort; p = 0.06; ß = 0.82). Athletes jumped significantly more times (12.23 ± 1.04 athletes; 9.35 ± 1.04 college cohort). Athletes had a lower proportion of 2 flaws: "thighs do not reach parallel" and "pause between jumps." Lower statistical power may limit interpretation of the remaining flaws. The lack of control of the number of jumps may impact TJA score. To improve the TJA usefulness on the field and clinic, the protocol may need to standardize the number of jumps.

Interrater and Intrarater Reliability of the Tuck Jump Assessment by Health Professionals of Varied Educational Backgrounds.

Objective. The Tuck Jump Assessment (TJA), a clinical plyometric assessment, identifies 10 jumping and landing technique flaws. The study objective was to investigate TJA interrater and intrarater reliability with raters of different educational and clinical backgrounds. Methods. 40 participants were video recorded performing the TJA using published protocol and instructions. Five raters of varied educational and clinical backgrounds scored the TJA. Each score of the 10 technique flaws was summed for the total TJA score. Approximately one month later, 3 raters scored the videos again. Intraclass correlation coefficients determined interrater (5 and 3 raters for first and second session, resp.) and intrarater (3 raters) reliability. Results. Interrater reliability with 5 raters was poor (ICC = 0.47; 95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.33-0.62). Interrater reliability between 3 raters who completed 2 scoring sessions improved from 0.52 (95% CI 0.35-0.68) for session one to 0.69 (95% CI 0.55-0.81) for session two. Intrarater reliability was poor to moderate, ranging from 0.44 (95% CI 0.22-0.68) to 0.72 (95% CI 0.55-0.84). Conclusion. Published protocol and training of raters were insufficient to allow consistent TJA scoring. There may be a learned effect with the TJA since interrater reliability improved with repetition. TJA instructions and training should be modified and enhanced before clinical implementation.