The Mechanics of Movement: Biomechanics in Sports Performance

Topic Information

Dear Colleagues,

The purpose of this Topic is to specify the principles of mathematics, functional anatomy, and mechanics to explore and understand biological problems in sports performance. This can discriminate between parameters research, permitting the optimization of human behavior. This Topic aims to summarize the most important parameters influencing human performance in health sciences across all age groups throughout their lives. Studies that promote the latest research in biomechanics, health, quality of life improvement, and sport rehabilitation are welcome. In addition, the aim of this Topic is to prevent functional decline and frailty by adopting a life course perspective approach. This is leveraged through using the latest research on movement mechanics and sports performance, targeting all stages of life for prevention, performance improvement, and the management of sports diseases. Modeling, simulation, quantification, and computing the musculoskeletal system allow for quantifying and improving discriminate parameters that characterize movement in different contexts, such as sports, work, and daily life. The aim is to effectively combine and coordinate research and results to better understand and improve human movement across various fields, including life, medicine, sports, and work.

Prof. Dr. Mario Bernardo-Filho
Dr. Danúbia Da Cunha De Sá-Caputo
Prof. Dr. Redha Taiar
Topic Editors

Keywords

Participating Journals

Journal Name	Impact Factor	CiteScore	Launched Year	First Decision (median)	APC
Biology biology	3.5	7.4	2012	17.4 Days	CHF 2700	Submit
Brain Sciences brainsci	2.8	5.6	2011	16.2 Days	CHF 2200	Submit
Sports sports	2.9	4.1	2013	18.7 Days	CHF 1800	Submit
Biomechanics biomechanics	1.4	2.4	2021	23 Days	CHF 1200	Submit
Journal of Functional Morphology and Kinesiology jfmk	2.5	3.7	2016	26.9 Days	CHF 1800	Submit
Physiologia physiologia	2.3	-	2021	18.5 Days	CHF 1000	Submit

Preprints.org is a multidisciplinary platform offering a preprint service designed to facilitate the early sharing of your research. It supports and empowers your research journey from the very beginning.

MDPI Topics is collaborating with Preprints.org and has established a direct connection between MDPI journals and the platform. Authors are encouraged to take advantage of this opportunity by posting their preprints at Preprints.org prior to publication:

1. Share your research immediately: disseminate your ideas prior to publication and establish priority for your work.
2. Safeguard your intellectual contribution: Protect your ideas with a time-stamped preprint that serves as proof of your research timeline.
3. Boost visibility and impact: Increase the reach and influence of your research by making it accessible to a global audience.
4. Gain early feedback: Receive valuable input and insights from peers before submitting to a journal.
5. Ensure broad indexing: Web of Science (Preprint Citation Index), Google Scholar, Crossref, SHARE, PrePubMed, Scilit and Europe PMC.

Published Papers (2 papers)

Order results

Content type Publication Date

Result details

Normal Extended Compact

Journals

All Biology Brain Sciences Sports Biomechanics JFMK Physiologia

Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less

Select all

Export citation of selected articles as:

Plain Text BibTeX BibTeX (without abstracts) Endnote Endnote (without abstracts) Tab-delimited RIS

Error

Oops... you haven't selected anything for export.

Ok

clear

14 pages, 265 KB  

Open AccessArticle

Effect of Intra-Set Rest Periods on Back Squat Propulsive Impulse

by Liam J. Houlton, Jeremy A. Moody, Theodoros M. Bampouras and Joseph I. Esformes

Biomechanics 2025, 5(3), 69; https://doi.org/10.3390/biomechanics5030069 (registering DOI) - 6 Sep 2025

Abstract

Background: Cluster sets (CSs) maintain velocity and power in compound movements by employing similar propulsion strategies or maintaining impulse through different mechanisms. This study aimed to explore the effect of four CS conditions on back squat (BS) propulsion and provide models for estimating [...] Read more.

Background: Cluster sets (CSs) maintain velocity and power in compound movements by employing similar propulsion strategies or maintaining impulse through different mechanisms. This study aimed to explore the effect of four CS conditions on back squat (BS) propulsion and provide models for estimating changes in propulsion based on repetition and set number. Methods: Twenty male participants (age = 28.3 ± 3.1 years, stature = 1.74 ± 8.21 m, body mass = 84.80 ± 7.80 kg, BS 1RM = 140.90 ± 24.20 kg) completed four data collection sessions. Each session consisted of three sets of five repetitions at 80% 1RM BS with three minutes of unloaded inter-set rest, using varying intra-set rest intervals. Experimental conditions included 0 s (TRAD), 10 s (CS10), 20 s (CS20), and 30 s (CS30) inter-repetition rest, randomly assigned to sessions in a counterbalanced order. Ground reaction force data were collected on dual force platforms sampling at 1000 Hz, from which net propulsive impulse (J_PROP), mean force (MF), and propulsion time (t_PROP) were calculated. Conditions and sets were analysed using a 4 × 3 (CONDITION*SET) repeated-measures ANOVA to assess differences between conditions and sets, and linear mixed models (LMMs) were used to provide regression equations for each dependent variable in each condition. Results: The ANOVA revealed no significant interactions for any dependent variable. No main effects of CONDITION or SET were observed for J_PROP. The main effects of CONDITION showed that MF was significantly lower in TRAD than CS20 (g = 0.757) and CS30 (g = 0.749). t_PROP was significantly higher in TRAD than CS20 (g = 0.437) and CS30 (g = 0.569). The main effects of SET showed that MF was significantly lower in S2 (g = 0.691) and S3 (g = 1.087) compared to S1. t_PROP was significantly higher in S2 (g = 0.866) and S3 (g = 1.179) compared to S1. LMMs for CS20 and CS30 revealed no significant effect (p > 0.05) between repetition or set number and dependent variables. Conclusions: The results suggest that CS20 and CS30 maintain J_PROP by limiting MF and t_PROP attenuation. This is less rest than that suggested by the previous literature, which may influence programming decisions during strength and power mesocycles to maximise training time and training density. LMMs provide accurate estimates of BS propulsive force attenuation when separating repetitions by up to 30 s, which may help practitioners optimise training load for long-term adaptations. Full article

(This article belongs to the Topic The Mechanics of Movement: Biomechanics in Sports Performance)

attachment

Supplementary material:
Supplementary File 1 (ZIP, 159 KB)

12 pages, 430 KB  

Open AccessBrief Report

Do Outcome or Movement Strategy Variables Provide Better Insights into Asymmetries During Multiple-Hops?

by Anthony Sharp, Jonathon Neville, Ryu Nagahara, Tomohito Wada and John Cronin

Biomechanics 2025, 5(3), 67; https://doi.org/10.3390/biomechanics5030067 - 2 Sep 2025

Viewed by 148

Abstract

Multiple-hops performed horizontally in series effectively assess return-to-play readiness, as they mimic the propulsive and decelerative demands of sports. Movement strategy variables (kinetic variables) offer more insight into injury recovery than outcome-based measures (kinematic variables) like hop distance alone. This study focused on [...] Read more.

Multiple-hops performed horizontally in series effectively assess return-to-play readiness, as they mimic the propulsive and decelerative demands of sports. Movement strategy variables (kinetic variables) offer more insight into injury recovery than outcome-based measures (kinematic variables) like hop distance alone. This study focused on kinematic and kinetic variables to assess asymmetries during triple-hop (3-Hop) and quintuple-hop (5-Hop) tests with 44 male athletes from university sports clubs and teams. The aim was to determine the magnitude and potential direction of asymmetry and compare the sensitivity of kinematic and kinetic variables. Results showed mean kinematic asymmetries below 7.1% (range: 0.00 to 28.9%), while average kinetic asymmetries were as high as 38.8% (range: 0.0% to 95.4%). These findings suggest that kinetic variables are more sensitive in assessing movement strategy, providing more detailed insight into rehabilitation and return-to-play decisions. The study emphasizes the importance of considering both outcome and movement strategy variables in injury recovery. These results have practical applications for clinicians and coaches supporting those in return-to-play scenarios, as well as those addressing performance deficits, therefore offering valuable information to refine exercise prescriptions and athletic program design. Full article

(This article belongs to the Topic The Mechanics of Movement: Biomechanics in Sports Performance)

►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less

Select all

Export citation of selected articles as:

Plain Text BibTeX BibTeX (without abstracts) Endnote Endnote (without abstracts) Tab-delimited RIS

 

Error

Oops... you haven't selected anything for export.

Ok

clear

Displaying articles 1-2