Comparison of a Countermovement Jump Test and Submaximal Run Test to Quantify the Sensitivity for Detecting Practically Important Changes Within High-Performance Australian Rules Football.

Abstract

To determine the typical variation of variables from a countermovement jump (CMJ) test and a submaximal run test (SRT), along with comparing the sensitivity of each test for the detection of practically important changes within high-performance Australian rules football players. A total of 23 professional and semiprofessional Australian rules football players performed 6 CMJs and three 8-second 50-m runs every 30 seconds (SRT), 7 days apart. Absolute and trial-to-trial reliability was represented as a coefficient of variation, CV (±90% confidence intervals). Test-retest reliability was examined using the magnitude of the difference (effect size [±90% confidence interval]) from week 1 to week 2. The smallest worthwhile change was calculated as 0.25 × SD. Good reliability (CVs = 6.6%-9.3%) was determined for all variables except eccentric displacement (CV = 12.8%), with no clear changes observed in any variables between week 1 and week 2. All variables from the SRT possessed a CV less than smallest worthwhile change, indicating an ability to detect practically important changes in performance. Only peak velocity from the CMJ test possessed a CV less than smallest worthwhile change, exhibiting a limitation of this test in detecting practically meaningful changes within this environment. The results suggest that while all variables possess acceptable reliability, a SRT might offer to be a more sensitive monitoring tool than a CMJ test within high-performance Australian rules football, due to its greater ability for detecting practically important changes in performance.