Affiliation:
1. Strength Training and Neuromuscular Performance (STreNgthP) Research Group, Camilo José Cela University, Madrid, Spain;
2. Directorate of Sport, Exercise and Physiotherapy, University of Salford, Frederick Road Campus, Manchester, United Kingdom;
3. Centre for Sport Studies, Rey Juan Carlos University, Madrid, Spain;
4. Department of Sport and Exercise Sciences, University of Chichester, Chichester, United Kingdom;
5. School of Medical and Health Sciences, Edith Cowan University, Joondalup, Australia;
6. Hawkin Dynamics, Inc., Westbrook, Maine; and
7. Department of Applied Sciences and Health, Coventry University, Coventry, United Kingdom
Abstract
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,
= 0.534–0.903). Exercise selection had a significant and large effect on power, impulse, work, and force (p < 0.016,
= 0.387–0.534). There was a significant and large effect of load × exercise interaction on work, displacement, and duration (p < 0.019,
= 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.
Publisher
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)