Table 2.
Summary of Evidence. Table 2a. General fatigue protocols.
| Study | Participants’ characteristics | Fatigue protocol | Landing task | Outcome measures | Fatigue effects |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Abergel et al. (2020) | 21♀ dancers with ≥5y experience (age: 19.6 ± 5.7y) | Dance-specific fatigue choreography (common jumps, leaps, and turns) until BORG-20 ≥ 17 | DL sauté (n=12) | 3D pelvic kinematics (RoM from IC to peak angle), immediately post-fatigue | Pelvic kinematics: *↑ anterior pelvic tilt (p < 0.001) |
| Kim et al. (2015) | 21 (14♂, 7♀) physically active subjects (≥1.5h/week, ≥3x0.5h; age: 23.0 ± 3.0y) | 3 exercises (5 min incremental running, 20 s lateral CMJ with a cadence controlled by a metronome (88 Hz), 20 max alternating vertical CMJ from lunging position, 10 s between exercises) until BORG-20 ≥ 17 and max vertical jump height ↓ with ≥20% | SL forward (1 m distance) side-cutting on dominant leg (n=5) | sEMG of GMax on dominant leg (whole curve analysis during ground contact phase), immediately post- fatigue | sEMG of GMax: *↓ activity 0–5% and at 35% of ground contact phase (p < 0.05) |
| Lessi et al. (2017) | 40 recreational athletes (≥3x/week; 20♂, age: 22.8 ± 2.9y; 20♀, age: 23.6 ± 3.0y) | 3 exercises (10 DL squats until 90° knee FLEX, 2 max vertical jumps, 20 step-ups onto 31 cm heights) until average distance during 3 max SL hops ↓ with ≥20% | SL DVJ on dominant leg from 31 cm box (n=3) | 3D trunk and pelvic kinematics (angles at IC and peak), and sEMG of GMed and GMax (average amplitude from IC to peak knee FLEX), immediately post- fatigue | Trunk kinematics: no diff for FLEX at IC (p > 0.05), *↑ FLEX at peak (p < 0.001), no diff for SB at IC and peak (p > 0.05) Pelvic kinematics: *↑ contralat. pelvic drop at IC and peak (p < 0.001) sEMG of GMed: no diff (p > 0.05) sEMG of GMax: *↑ activity (p = 0.013) |
| Liederbach et al. (2014) | Group 1: 40 ballet/modern dancers (20♂, age: 27.0 ± 6.0y; 20♀, age: 25.0 ± 5.0y) | Circuits of 2 exercises (50 step-ups onto 30 cm heights, 15 SL max vertical jumps) until max SL vertical jump height ↓ with ≥10% | SL DVJ on dominant leg from height of 30 cm (n=3) | 3D trunk kinematics (peak angles), not specified at which moment this was assessed post- fatigue | Trunk kinematics: *↑ FLEX (p = 0.002) and *↑ (right) SB (p < 0.001) in group 1 and 2 |
| Group 2: 40 athletes from jumping/cutting sports (20♂, age: 22.0 ± 2.0y; 20♀, age: 20.0 ± 2.0y) | |||||
| Smeets et al. (2019) | 18 (10♂, 8♀) competitive athletes (≥3x/week; age: 21.3 ± 1.5y) | SAFT-5: 5 min soccer match simulation (sprinting, jogging, agility drills, slalom, CMJ and scissor jumps) | SL jumps (n=3): hop for distance (n=3), medial hop (n=3), vertical hop with 90° of med ROT (n=3) | sEMG of GMed bilateral (whole curve analysis from IC to 500 ms after IC), not specified at which moment this was assessed post- fatigue | sEMG of GMed: no diff (p > 0.05) |
| Smeets et al. (2020) | 21 (15♂, 6♀) competitive athletes (training ≥2x/week; match ≥1x/week; age: 21.5 ± 1.5y): soccer (n=13), volleyball (n=4), basketball (n=2), hurdles (n=1), and dancing (n=1) | SAFT-5 (5 min) | SL max vertical hop with 90° of medial ROT on dominant and non-dominant leg (n=3) | 3D trunk on pelvic kinematics (whole curve analysis from IC to 500 ms after IC), not specified at which moment this was assessed post-fatigue | Trunk on pelvic kinematics: *↓ FLEX during 13–179 ms of the vertical hop with medial ROT (p < 0.001, small ES) |
| Whyte et al. (2018a) | 22♂ university athletes (≥3x/week; age: 21.9 ± 1.1y) | HIIP (circuits of forward/backward sprints (5 m), 10 DL forward jumps over 30 cm hurdles, 10 side- stepping exercises over 30 cm hurdles, and 4 side shuffles (5 m), 30 s rest between circuits) until BORG-20 ≥ 18 | DL DVJ from height of 30 cm (n=3) | 3D trunk on pelvic kinematics (whole curve analysis from IC to 1st occurrence of concentric centre of mass power), immediately post- fatigue | Trunk on pelvic kinematics: *↑ FLEX during whole landing phase (p < 0.001, medium ES) |
| Whyte et al. (2018b) | 28♂ university Gaelic football athletes (≥3x/week; age: 21.7 ± 2.2y) | HIIP until BORG-20 ≥ 18 | SL (un)anticipated crossover cutting (45°): forward jumps (70% max jump distance) on dominant leg | 3D trunk, trunk on pelvic and pelvic kinematics (whole curve analysis from IC to 1st minimum vGRF), 30 s post- fatigue | Trunk kinematics: no diff for FLEX, SB and ROT (p > 0.05) Trunk on pelvic kinematics: no diff for FLEX, SB and ROT (p > 0.05) |
| Pelvic kinematics: *↓ anterior pelvic tilt 84–100% of landing phase (p = 0.049; small ES), no diff for pelvic drop and ROT (p > 0.05) | |||||
| Whyte et al. (2018c) | 28♂ university Gaelic football athletes (≥3x/week; age: 21.7 ± 2.2y) | HIIP until BORG-20 ≥ 18 | SL (un)anticipated side-cutting (45°): forward jumps (70% max jump distance) on dominant leg | 3D trunk, trunk on pelvic and pelvic kinematics (whole curve analysis from IC to 1st minimum vGRF), not specified at which moment this was assessed post- fatigue | Trunk kinematics: *↑ FLEX 1–100% of landing phase (p < 0.001, small ES), *↑ SB away from cutting direction 1–88% of landing phase (p = 0.038, small ES), no diff for ROT (p > 0.05) |
| Trunk on pelvis kinematics: *↑ SB away from cutting direction 1– 75% of landing phase (p = 0.039, small ES), no diff for FLEX and ROT (p > 0.05) | |||||
| Pelvic kinematics: *↓ anterior pelvic tilt 81–100% of landing phase (p = 0.049, small ES), no diff for SB and ROT (p > 0.05) | |||||
| Wong et al. (2020) | 12♀ college athletes (≥4–6x/week; age: 21.3 ± 1.5 y): volleyball (n=4) and basketball (n=8) | Circuits of 2 exercises (50 step- ups onto 30 cm heights, 15 SL max vertical jumps) until max vertical jump height ↓ with ≥10% and BORG-20 ≥ 17 | DL DVJ from 30 cm box positioned at 50% of subjects’ height (n=5) | 3D trunk on pelvic kinematics (angles at IC), not specified at which moment this was assessed post- fatigue | Trunk on pelvic kinematics: *↓ FLEX at IC (p = 0.001) |