Abstract des Autors

Jump performance provides meaningful information both for sporting and clinical needs. Current state of the art in jump performance assessment is laboratory‐bound; however, out‐of‐the‐laboratory methods are desirable. Therefore, the purposes of the present investigation were (a) to explore whether utilizing a novel analytical approach minimizes the bias between inertial recording unit (IMU)‐based and jump mat‐based jump height estimates and (b) to provide a thorough tutorial for a sport scientist (see Appendix S1) to facilitate standardization of jump height estimation. Forty‐one women, men, and boys aged 6 to 77 years completed three maximal countermovement jumps without arm swing, which were concurrently registered with a jump mat, and an IMU worn in low lumbar region. Excellent agreement between the novel IMU‐based jump height and jump mat jump height was observed (mean IMU 22.6 [8.3] cm, mean jump mat 22.7 [8.9], mean bias −0.1 cm [95% limits of agreement −4.5 cm to 4.4 cm; P = .826], and intra‐class correlation coefficient 0.97 [95% CI 0.94 to 0.98, P < .001]). In conclusion, inertial recordings conducted with lightweight IMUs worn on the hip provide a valid and feasible assessment of jump height among people with varying athletic ability. Inertial signals have the potential to afford (at least semi‐) automated analysis pipeline with low labor cost thus being potentially feasible in applied settings such as in professional sports or in the clinics.