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

Dudley LA, Smith CA, Olson BK, Chimera NJ, Schmitz B, Warren M - J Sports Med (Hindawi Publ Corp) (2013)

Bottom Line: Results.Conclusion.There may be a learned effect with the TJA since interrater reliability improved with repetition.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: North Country HealthCare, 301 South 7th Street, Williams, AZ 86046, USA.

ABSTRACT
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.

No MeSH data available.


Lower extremity valgus at landing.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection


getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4590911&req=5

fig2: Lower extremity valgus at landing.

Mentions: Raters used a previously published form to score technique flaws [8]. Technique flaws included: (1) lower extremity valgus at landing (Figure 2), (2) thighs do not reach parallel (peak of jump), (3) thighs not equal side-to-side (during flight), (4) foot placement not shoulder width apart, (5) foot placement not parallel (front to back), (6) foot contact timing not equal, (7) excessive landing contact noise, (8) pause between jumps, (9) technique declines prior to 10 seconds, and (10) does not land in same footprint (excessive in-flight motion) [8]. Additional figures depicting these technique flaws can be found in previously published TJA studies [6, 8, 10]. The participants were rated as either demonstrating a technique flaw or not. Per previously published literature, the flaws were then summed for the TJA total score [6, 8].


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

Dudley LA, Smith CA, Olson BK, Chimera NJ, Schmitz B, Warren M - J Sports Med (Hindawi Publ Corp) (2013)

Lower extremity valgus at landing.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4590911&req=5

fig2: Lower extremity valgus at landing.
Mentions: Raters used a previously published form to score technique flaws [8]. Technique flaws included: (1) lower extremity valgus at landing (Figure 2), (2) thighs do not reach parallel (peak of jump), (3) thighs not equal side-to-side (during flight), (4) foot placement not shoulder width apart, (5) foot placement not parallel (front to back), (6) foot contact timing not equal, (7) excessive landing contact noise, (8) pause between jumps, (9) technique declines prior to 10 seconds, and (10) does not land in same footprint (excessive in-flight motion) [8]. Additional figures depicting these technique flaws can be found in previously published TJA studies [6, 8, 10]. The participants were rated as either demonstrating a technique flaw or not. Per previously published literature, the flaws were then summed for the TJA total score [6, 8].

Bottom Line: Results.Conclusion.There may be a learned effect with the TJA since interrater reliability improved with repetition.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: North Country HealthCare, 301 South 7th Street, Williams, AZ 86046, USA.

ABSTRACT
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.

No MeSH data available.