Kinetics and kinematics of the push press, push jerk, and split jerk

Document Type

Journal Article

Publication Title

Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research

Volume

38

Issue

8

First Page

1359

Last Page

1365

PubMed ID

39072653

Publisher

National Strength and Conditioning Association

School

School of Medical and Health Sciences

Funders

Universidad Camilo José Cela

Comments

Soriano, M. A., Jiménez-Ormeño, E., Lake, J. P., McMahon, J. J., Gallo-Salazar, C., Mundy, P., & Comfort, P. (2024). Kinetics and kinematics of the push press, push jerk, and split jerk. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research, 38(8), 1359-1365. https://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0000000000004810

Abstract

Soriano, MA, Jiménez-Ormeño, E, Lake, JP, McMahon, JJ, Gallo-Salazar, C, Mundy, P, and Comfort, P. Kinetics and kinematics of the push press, push jerk, and split jerk. J Strength Cond Res 38(8): 1359-1365, 2024 - The aim of this study was to explore the kinetics and kinematics across incremental loads with the push press (PP), push jerk (PJ), and split jerk (SJ). Eighteen resistance-trained men performed the 1 repetition maximum (1RM) tests (visit 1) 3-7 days before an incremental loading protocol (60, 75, and 90% 1RM) of the 3 exercises (visit 2). Kinetics and kinematics were derived from force-time data and compared using a repeated-measures analysis of variance with load and exercise as within-subject factors. Dependent variables for the biomechanics assessment were categorized as output (power and impulse), driver (force and work), and strategy (displacement and duration) metrics. The interrepetition reliability was assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient and coefficient of variation. The PP, PJ, and SJ 1RM performance were 89.7 ± 15.4, 95.6 ± 14.4, and 103.0 ± 16.9 kg, respectively. Driver, strategy, and outcome metrics displayed moderate-to-excellent (intraclass correlation coefficient: 0.58-0.98) reliability with acceptable variability (% coefficient of variation: 2.02-10.00). Increased load resulted in significantly large increases in force, work, displacement, duration, power, and impulse (p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.534-0.903). Exercise selection had a significant and large effect on power, impulse, work, and force (p < 0.016, ηp2 = 0.387-0.534). There was a significant and large effect of load × exercise interaction on work, displacement, and duration (p < 0.019, ηp2 = 0.158-0.220). Practitioners are encouraged to use heavier loads (90 > 75 > 60% 1RM) during the SJ exercise to maximize output, driver, and strategy kinetics and kinematics.

DOI

10.1519/JSC.0000000000004810

Access Rights

free_to_read

Share

 
COinS