Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport

ISSN: 0270-1367 (Print) 2168-3824 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/urqe20

Physiological Demands of Trampolining at

Different Intensities

Nick Draper, Tane Clement & Keith Alexander

To cite this article: Nick Draper, Tane Clement & Keith Alexander (2020) Physiological Demands
of Trampolining at Different Intensities, Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 91:1, 136-141,
DOI: 10.1080/02701367.2019.1651448

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/02701367.2019.1651448

Published online: 16 Oct 2019.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 142

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=urqe20
RESEARCH QUARTERLY FOR EXERCISE AND SPORT
2020, VOL. 91, NO. 1, 136–141
https://doi.org/10.1080/02701367.2019.1651448

Physiological Demands of Trampolining at Different Intensities

Nick Draper, Tane Clement , and Keith Alexander
University of Canterbury

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

Purpose: The aim of this study was to examine the physiological demands of trampolining, in Received 16 October 2018
comparison with treadmill running, using a larger sample size and a wider range of physiological Accepted 28 July 2019
measures, than had been reported in the previous research. Method: Twenty-three healthy adults KEYWORDS
completed three, three-minute exercise bouts on both a trampoline and treadmill at different Trampoline; treadmill;
intensities. Heart rate (HR), oxygen consumption (VO _ 2 ), energy expenditure (EE) and blood lactate physiological demands;
(BL) were collected for each bout. Results: Results of a two-way repeated measures MANOVA oxygen consumption
indicated that there was a significant difference between the modalities (F6;86 = 9.3, p <.0005,
n2 partial = 0.39). A follow up two-way repeated measures ANOVA then identified that significant
differences existed between the modalities for each of the variables; VO _ 2 (F2;44 = 159, p <.0005,
n2 partial = 0.88), EE (= 136, p <.0005, n2 partial = 0.86) and BL (F2;44 = 171, p <.0005, n2 partial = 0.89).
Subsequent post hoc testing found VO _ 2 to differ significantly between the medium intensities
(p =.01 d =0.6). EE to differ significantly for the medium (p =.003, d =−0.7) and high intensities
(p =.02, d =−0.5). BL to differ significantly for the low (p =.04, d =0.4), medium (p =.03, d =0.5) and
high (p =.001 d =1.4) intensities. Conclusions: The results from our study indicated that while
significant differences do occur between running and trampolining for a given intensity, the
trendline associated with each of the variables is similar. Therefore, monitoring the intensity of the
session based the percentage of the participant’s maximum heart rate, which is commonly used in
running, may also be applied to trampolining.

Purpose
Regular physical activity is a crucial component of
a healthy lifestyle, providing many benefits, such as;
increased muscle mass (Rogers & Evans, 1993),
increased bone density (Marques, Mota, & Carvalho,
2012), improved cardiovascular function (Berthouze
et al., 1995) and mental health benefits (Lawlor &
Hopker, 2001). A commonly cited reason for low phy-
sical activity and exercise levels is one of boredom
(Marshall & Biddle, 2001). Trampolining is an enjoy-
able physical activity modality, which is becoming
increasingly popular as a recreational activity.
However, there appears to be a lack of research con-
cerning the physiological demands and potential bene-
fits of trampolining. A number of studies exist for
related aspects using mini-trampolining. Mini-
trampolining has been shown to; increase balance abil-
ity (Aragão, Karamanidis, Vaz, & Arampatzis, 2011; de
Oliveira, da Silva, Dascal, & Teixeira, 2014; Heitkamp,
Horstmann, Mayer, Weller, & Dickhuth, 2001; Kidgell,
Horvath, Jackson, & Seymour, 2007; Miklitsch, Krewer,
Freivogel, & Steube, 2013), leg strength (Heitkamp
et al., 2001; Karakollukcu, Aslan, Paoli, Bianco, &
Sahin, 2015) and jump performance (Karakollukcu
et al., 2015). Further, it has been shown that one mini-
trampoline session of moderate to high intensity can
temporarily reduce blood glucose levels in normogly-
cemic adults (Cunha et al., 2016). Also that several
weeks of moderate-intensity mini trampoline rebound-
ing can induce significant improvements in mean
HbA1c and fasting plasma glucose levels (Maharaj &
Nuhu, 2016), as well as in insulin resistance (Nuhu &
Maharaj, 2017) in individuals with type 2 diabetes
mellitus. In addition, it has been found that three 60-
min exercise sessions of moderate to vigorous intensity
(5.2 MET) significantly increase work capacity (watts)
and VO _ 2max in middle-aged, overweight women over
12 weeks (L. Cugusi et al., 2017, 2016).
Comparison between the findings for mini-trampolines
and full-sized trampolines is more difficult, due to the
differences in the size of the jumping bed. Bouncing on
a full-sized trampoline not only results in greater forces

CONTACT Tane Clement tane.clement@pg.canterbury.ac.nz School of Health Science, University of Canterbury, Dovedale Ave, Ilam, Christchurch
8041, New Zealand
Color versions of one or more of the figures in the article can be found online at www.tandfonline.com/urqe.
© 2019 SHAPE America

acting on the jumper, but the bouncing mechanism funda-
mentally differs (McGlone, Kravitz, & Janot, 2002). On
a mini-trampoline, the bounce is often focused on
a downward push into the trampoline mat, rather than an
upward movement. The only research that appears to have
been published on the physiological demands of trampolin-
ing is the 1980 paper by Bhattacharya and coworkers
(Bhattacharya, McCutcheon, Shvartz, & Greenleaf, 1980),
which, while widely cited as a consequence, provided data
from only eight young male participants. This paper con-
cluded that trampolining had a similar oxygen demand to
treadmill running, at the same intensity. Given the potential
health benefits of trampolining, it is essential that the phy-
siological demands be more widely investigated. Therefore,
the aim of this study was to confirm whether the findings of
the 1980 NASA paper can be replicated with a larger sample
size, in a different laboratory.
Methods
Participants
The participants consisted of 23 healthy adults (9 male, 14
female). Participants ranged 18–40 years, with a mean age
of 26 ±5 years. Mean values for males and females were;
height (178 cm±6) (165 cm±4), mass (78 kg±11) (69 ±11),
muscle mass (37 kg±5) (27 kg±4) and BMI (25 ±4) (25 ±4)
respectively. All participants had the prior trampolining
experience, but none had experience trampolining in
a competitive or sporting context. The study was completed
across two separate sessions, 1 week apart, between June
and August, 2017. Exclusion criteria were health risks that
contraindicate exercise testing (ACSM, 2013), diseases that
are associated with loss of balance, as well as the presence of
infections, injuries or an existing drug treatment that could
potentially limit physical performance. Participants who
passed the screening were given detailed information
about the study’s aim and protocol and gave written con-
sent before participation. This study was approved by the
ethics committee of the University of Canterbury.
Anthropometric measures
On each of the testing days, the participant’s height and
mass were measured to allow accurate analysis of oxygen
consumption. Weight was obtained using a bio-
impedance scale (Inbody 230, Inbody, Seoul, Korea).
Body-fat and muscle mass were obtained using the same
machine by the method of bioelectrical impedance analy-
sis (Lukaski, Johnson, Bolonchuk, & Lykken, 1985).
Trampolining protocol
Prior to testing, a heart rate monitor (H7, Polar, Kemplele,
Finland) and breath by breath gas analyzer (K5, COSMED,
RESEARCH QUARTERLY FOR EXERCISE AND SPORT 137
Rome, Italy) were placed on the participant. Resting Heart
rate (RHR) (while sitting) and blood lactate (BL) (LT-1730,
Arkray, Edina, USA), were then recorded. Participants were
then instructed to bounce on a trampoline (S113,
Springfree, Christchurch, New Zealand) at three different
intensities equivalent to a walk, jog and max effort. In
regard to the intensities, each participant was briefed on
the required intensity and was active enough in their life-
style that they were able to understand and work to these
intensities. Participants were given a 3-s countdown, then
instructed to begin. For 3 min; heart rate (HR), oxygen
consumption (VO _ 2 ) and energy consumption (EE) were
recorded using the gas analyzer. Total jump height and the
number of jumps performed were recorded during the bout
using an accelerometer built into the trampoline (TGOMA,
Springfree, Christchurch, New Zealand). At the end of the
bout, the participant was stopped and asked to sit. Rate of
perceived exertion (RPE) according to the 6–20 Borg Scale
(Borg, 1998) and BL were the collected. The participant was
asked to remain seated until their VO _ 2 and HR had
returned to resting levels. This protocol was then repeated
for the jog and maximum effort intensities. Risk of injury
was mitigated during the bouncing through the use of
a Springfree trampoline. These trampolines utilize a safety
net and a cantilever tensioning design. This minimizes the
risk of ejection or risk of collision with a hard surface.
Running protocol
Prior to testing each participant was fitted with the
same heart rate monitor and gas analyzer that were
used during the trampolining test. RMR and BL were
then recorded. Participants were then instructed to
begin moving on the treadmill (EXC Run 900,
Technogym, Bracknell, UK) The treadmill speed was
increased until HR reached a value within five beats
per minute (bpm) of the value recorded during the last
10 s of the walk trampoline intensity. This speed was
altered across the bout by 0.5km/hr increments, to
achieve an HR that was within 5 bpm of the desired
HR. For 3 min; HR, VO _ 2 and EE were recorded. At the
end of the bout, the participant was stopped and asked
to sit. RPE, BL, final treadmill speed and total distance
run were then recorded. The participant was asked to
remain seated until their VO_ 2 and HR had returned to
resting levels. This procedure was then repeated for the
jog and maximum effort intensities.
Statistical analysis
Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS Statistics for
Windows (Version 25.0, IBM Corp, Armonk, NY, USA).
138 N. DRAPER ET AL.

For each of the variables, the data was averaged across the Post-hoc tests were then used to evaluate the differ-
final 30 s of each bout. Datasets were first assessed for ences between the trampoline and treadmill for each of
normality using a Shapiro–Wilks test. All variables, except the individual efforts. Paired samples t-tests and Cohen’s
the blood lactate results, were found to follow a normal d were used to interpret the difference. For the low
distribution. Due to the sample size (n = 23), the following effort, a significant difference exists only between the
tests were considered sufficiently robust to account for BL (p =.04, d =0.4). For the medium effort, significant
this error. A two-way repeated measures MANOVA were difference occurs between VO _ 2 (p =.01, d =−0.6), EE
used to assess whether significant differences existed (p =.003, d =−0.7) and BL (p =.03, d =0.5). For the high
between the means for VO _ 2 , EE and BL. Equipment effort, significant difference occurs between EE (p =.02,
type (trampoline, treadmill) and intensity (low, medium, d =−0.5) and BL (p =.001 d =1.4).
high) were used as the independent variables. After find-
ing a significant difference between the groups, a series of
two-way repeated measures ANOVAs were used to iden- Discussion
tify a significant difference between the individual vari-
The aim of this study was to examine the physiological
ables. Significant difference was found between the
demands of trampolining using a larger sample size than
intensities for each of the variables, so post hoc tests
had been reported in the previous literature. Omnibus
were used to further evaluate these differences. Paired
tests indicated significant differences between the means
samples t-tests were used to determine statistical signifi-
for the trampoline and treadmill. Further analysis indi-
cance between the running and bouncing for each of the
cated significant differences between each of the inten-
different intensities for VO_ 2 , EE and BL. Effect size _ 2 and EE are similar between
sities. At low intensities VO
(Cohen’s d) was then used to interpret the differences. bouncing and running, while BL differs significantly. At
medium intensities VO _ 2 , EE and BL were significantly
different. At high intensities VO _ 2 values were similar,
Results whereas EE and BL were significantly different. These
Means and standard deviations for the collected vari- differences indicate that the mode of exercise is affecting
ables can be seen in Table 1. the demands on the participant’s energy systems.
A two-way repeated measures MANOVA were used Comparisons between the 1980 NASA paper and
to assess whether significant differences existed our dataset showed no significant difference between
between the means for VO _ 2 , EE and BL (F6;86 = 9.3, the VO_ 2 /kg values for both the trampoline and tread-
2
p <.0005, n partial = 0.39). A series of two-way repeated mill. The mean values for VO _ 2 for both the trampoline
measures ANOVAs were then used to identify and treadmill are higher in the NASA paper than in the
a significant difference between the individual variables. current studies dataset. The explanation appears to be
Significant differences were found between the intensi- that the NASA participants were “young fit males”,
_ 2 (F2;44 = 159, p <.0005, n2 partial = 0.88), EE
ties for VO whereas this study drew from a broader range of parti-
(F2;44 = 136, p <.0005, n2 partial = 0.86) and blood lactate cipants, to better represent the general populace.
Therefore, the difference in scores between the two
(F2;44 = 171, p <.0005, n2 partial = 0.89).
studies can likely be attributed to the differences
between an athletic population and the general popula-
Table 1. Means (±SD) of the recorded variables, at each inten- tion. This confirms that the values provided by the
sity for both the trampoline and treadmill efforts. NASA paper were accurate and repeatable, validating
Trampoline Treadmill
them as a reliable measure. This also confirms the
Mean ± SD Mean ± SD
statement that “trampolining had a similar oxygen
Low Effort
Heart Rate (bpm) 118 ± 16 118 ± 19 demand to treadmill running, at the same intensity”.
Oxygen Consumption (VO2/min/kg) 22 ± 5 23 ± 6 Though significant differences exist between the
Energy Expenditure (kj/min/kg) 0.3 ± 0.1 0.3 ± 0.1
Blood Lactate (mmol/L) 1.8 ± 0.6 1.5 ± 0.6 demands for trampolining and running, as can be
Medium Effort seen in Figures 1 & 2, the trendline for VO _ 2 follows
Heart Rate (bpm) 145 ± 18 147 ± 17
Oxygen Consumption (VO2/min/kg) 30 ± 6 33 ± 6 a similar curve between the exercise modes. It is well
Energy Expenditure (kj/min/kg) 0.3 ± 0.1 0.4 ± 0.1 established for running that the outcomes of training
Blood Lactate (mmol/L) 2.9 ± 1.2 2.4 ± 1.2
High Effort may be affected by altering the intensity at which the
Heart Rate (bpm) 179 ± 10 175 ± 10
Oxygen Consumption (VO2/min/kg) 43 ± 8 44 ± 8
training is preformed (Bacon, Carter, Ogle, & Joyner,
Energy Expenditure (kj/min/kg) 0.5 ± 0.1 0.5 ± 0.1 2013). Therefore, because the trendlines are so similar,
Blood Lactate (mmol/L) 8.2 ± 2.5 4.9 ± 1.8
it follows that the training outcomes from the use of

either a trampoline or treadmill are likely to be similar.
This means the trampolining is likely to provide the
myriad of benefits associated with regular running such
as increased cardiovascular fitness, muscle mass, bone
density, and improved mental wellbeing.
Where trampolining and running differed the most
powerfully was in the measure of anaerobic energy
production, which can be seen from the higher BL.
This suggests that trampolining is more taxing on the
anaerobic systems for a given heart rate. Increased
anaerobic energy production may lead to improve-
ments in muscle mass and lactate tolerance (Haff &
Triplett, 2015). Therefore, this may mean that trampo-
lining has some inherent benefit over other forms of
exercise. Further research is necessary to ascertain the
exact nature and scope of these benefits.
_ 2 at each intensity for both running and trampolining.
Figure 1. Comparing the VO
Figure 2. Comparing the blood lactate at each intensity for both running and trampolining.
RESEARCH QUARTERLY FOR EXERCISE AND SPORT 139
The mechanism which caused these differences in
energy production is unknown and the author hypothe-
sizes that it could have potentially been caused by any of
three different mechanisms. The first mechanism is lack
of exercise economy with trampolining compared to
running. Exercise economy, or the efficiency of move-
ment during exercise, contributes heavily to the energy
demands on the body (Daniels & Daniels, 1992).
Running is an exercise mode where the participant is
likely to exhibit a higher economy of movement, com-
pared to bouncing on a trampoline, due to prior practise
(Kyröläinen, Belli, & Komi, 2001). Therefore, it may be
that the participants were just significantly less efficient at
trampolining compared to running, which was reflected
in the increased anaerobic energy production while tram-
polining. A limitation of this study was a lack of
140 N. DRAPER ET AL.
accounting for this variable. Future research could first
include a training block where participants are bouncing
regularly. This would improve the participant’s familiar-
isation with the trampoline and mitigate exercise econ-
omy as a confounding variable.
The second potential mechanism for the difference in
energy production between the two exercise modes is the
difference in energy production between concentric-
focused exercises and eccentric-focused exercises. An exer-
cise being more or less eccentric-focused affects both energy
(Perrey, Betik, Candau, Rouillon, & Hughson, 2001) and
metabolite production (Goto et al., 2009). To the best of the
author’s knowledge, no research has been published inves-
tigating whether the motions of trampolining and running
differ significantly for one to be considered concentric
focused and the other eccentric focused. If this classification
could be made then this difference in muscle action may
explain the difference in anaerobic energy production.
The third mechanism of note is the unique properties of
trampolining as an exercise mode. Most exercise modes
involve continuous muscle action throughout the exercise
bout. Trampolining has a distinct break between the muscle
actions as the participant travels through the air. This
essentially provides a short rest interval between the muscle
actions. Further investigation is necessary to determine
whether this rest time provides significant benefit or detri-
ment in terms of the desired training outcome.
Conclusion
The aim of this study was to examine the physiological
demands of trampolining, compared to treadmill running,
using a larger sample size and a wider range of physiological
measures, than had been reported in the previous research.
Analysis of the current study’s dataset found a significant
difference between trampolining and treadmill running for
_ 2 , EE and BL. These differences indicate that trampolin-
VO
ing and treadmill running exert different physiological
demands on the body, most notably for anaerobic energy
production. While significant differences exist between the
demands on aerobic and anaerobic energy sources for run-
ning and trampolining. The trendlines for aerobic energy
production are similar enough that the statement “trampo-
lining had a similar oxygen demand to treadmill running, at
the same intensity” can be considered accurate. Therefore,
this validates trampolining as a viable exercise modality
with similar benefits to that of running.
What Does This Article Add?
This paper compares running (an extremely common
exercise mode) to trampolining (a less generic exercise
mode) and evaluates the acute physiological changes
affected by both. This has value as a method of evalu-
ating trampolining’s efficacy as an exercise mode and
whether it may have unique inherent value. An extre-
mely limited amount of research exists surrounding
trampolining, so this research is novel and may lead
to valuable further research.
Funding
This research was funded in-part by: Springfree New Zealand Ltd
Callaghan Innovation, a Crown Entity of New Zealand Grant
Number: E6730.
ORCID
Tane Clement http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7305-3136
References
ACSM. (2013). ACSM’s guidelines for exercise testing and
prescription. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams &
Wilkins.
Aragão, F. A., Karamanidis, K., Vaz, M. A., & Arampatzis, A.
(2011). Mini-trampoline exercise related to mechanisms of
dynamic stability improves the ability to regain balance in
elderly. Journal of Electromyography and Kinesiology, 21
(3), 512–518. doi:10.1016/j.jelekin.2011.01.003
Bacon, A. P., Carter, R. E., Ogle, E. A., & Joyner, M. J. (2013).
VO2max trainability and high intensity interval training in
humans: A meta-analysis. PLoS ONE, 8(9), e73182.
doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0073182
Berthouze, S. E., Minaire, P. M., Castells, J., Busso, T.,
Vico, L., & Lacour, J.-R. (1995). Relationship between
mean habitual daily energy expenditure and maximal oxy-
gen uptake. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 27
(8), 1170–1179.
Bhattacharya, A., McCutcheon, E. P., Shvartz, E., &
Greenleaf, J. E. (1980). Body acceleration distribution and
O2 uptake in humans during running and jumping.
Journal of Applied Physiology: Respiratory, Environmental
and Exercise Physiology, 49(5), 881–887. doi:10.1152/
jappl.1980.49.5.881
Borg, G. (1998). Borg’s perceived exertion and pain scales.
Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
Cugusi, L., Manca, A., Romita, G., Bergamin, M., Di
Blasio, A., & Mercuro, G. (2017). Exercise intensity and
energy expenditure during a mini-trampoline rebounding
exercise session in overweight women. Science & Sports, 32
(1), e23–e28. doi:10.1016/j.scispo.2016.06.006
Cugusi, L., Manca, A., Serpe, R., Romita, G., Bergamin, M.,
Cadeddu, C., … Mercuro, G. (2016). Effects of a
mini-trampoline rebounding exercise program on func-
tional parameters, body composition and quality of life in
overweight women. Journal of Sports Medicine and
Physical Fitness, 58(3), 287.
Cunha, R. M., Bentes, M. R., Araújo, V. H. C., Da Costa
Souza, M. C., Noleto, M. V., & Azevedo, A. (2016).
Changes in blood glucose among trained normoglycemic

adults during a mini-trampoline exercise session. Journal
of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness, 56(12), 1547–1553.
Daniels, J., & Daniels, N. (1992). Running economy of elite
male and elite female runners. Medicine and Science in
Sports and Exercise, 24(4), 483–489.
de Oliveira, M. R., da Silva, R. A., Dascal, J. B., &
Teixeira, D. C. (2014). Effect of different types of exercise
on postural balance in elderly women: A randomized con-
trolled trial. Archives of Gerontology and Geriatrics, 59(3),
506–514. doi:10.1016/j.archger.2014.08.009
Goto, K., Ishii, N., Kizuka, T., Kraemer, R. R., Honda, Y., &
Takamatsu, K. (2009). Hormonal and metabolic responses
to slow movement resistance exercise with different dura-
tions of concentric and eccentric actions. European Journal
of Applied Physiology, 106(5), 731–739. doi:10.1007/
s00421-009-1075-9
Haff, G. G., & Triplett, N. T. (2015). Essentials of strength
training and conditioning (4th ed.). Champaign,
IL: Human Kinetics.
Heitkamp, H., Horstmann, T., Mayer, F., Weller, J., &
Dickhuth, H. (2001). Gain in strength and muscular bal-
ance after balance training. International Journal of Sports
Medicine, 22(4), 285–290. doi:10.1055/s-2001-13819
Karakollukcu, M., Aslan, C., Paoli, A., Bianco, A., & Sahin, F.
(2015). Effects of mini trampoline exercise on male gym-
nasts’ physiological parameters: A pilot study. Journal of
Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness, 55(7–8), 730–734.
Kidgell, D. J., Horvath, D. M., Jackson, B. M., &
Seymour, P. J. (2007). Effect of six weeks of dura disc
and mini-trampoline balance training on postural sway
in athletes with functional ankle instability. Journal of
Strength and Conditioning Research, 21(2), 466–469.
doi:10.1519/00124278-200705000-00031
Kyröläinen, H., Belli, A., & Komi, P. V. (2001).
Biomechanical factors affecting running economy.
Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 33(8),
1330–1337.
Lawlor, D. A., & Hopker, S. W. (2001). The effectiveness of
exercise as an intervention in the management of depres-
sion: Systematic review and meta-regression analysis of
RESEARCH QUARTERLY FOR EXERCISE AND SPORT 141
randomised controlled trials. BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.),
322(7289), 763. doi:10.1136/bmj.322.7289.763
Lukaski, H. C., Johnson, P. E., Bolonchuk, W. W., &
Lykken, G. I. (1985). Assessment of fat-free mass using
bioelectrical impedance measurements of the human body.
American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 41(4), 810–817.
doi:10.1093/ajcn/41.4.810
Maharaj, S. S., & Nuhu, J. M. (2016). Rebound exercise:
A beneficial adjuvant for sedentary non-insulin-dependent
type 2 diabetic individuals in a rural environment.
Australian Journal of Rural Health, 24(2), 123–129.
doi:10.1111/ajr.12223
Marques, E. A., Mota, J., & Carvalho, J. (2012). Exercise
effects on bone mineral density in older adults: A
meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. AGE, 34
(6), 1493–1515. doi:10.1007/s11357-011-9311-8
Marshall, S. J., & Biddle, S. J. (2001). The transtheoretical model
of behavior change: A meta-analysis of applications to phy-
sical activity and exercise. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 23
(4), 229–246. doi:10.1207/S15324796ABM2304_2
McGlone, C., Kravitz, L., & Janot, J. M. (2002). Rebounding:
A low-impact exercise alternative. ACSM’s Health &
Fitness Journal, 6(2), 11.
Miklitsch, C., Krewer, C., Freivogel, S., & Steube, D. (2013).
Effects of a predefined mini-trampoline training programme
on balance, mobility and activities of daily living after stroke:
A randomized controlled pilot study. Clinical Rehabilitation,
27(10), 939–947. doi:10.1177/0269215513485591
Nuhu, J., & Maharaj, S. (2017). Influence of a mini trampoline
rebound exercise program on insulin resistance, lipid profile
and central obesity in individuals with type 2 diabetes.
Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness, 58(4), 503.
Perrey, S., Betik, A., Candau, R., Rouillon, J. D., &
Hughson, R. L. (2001). Comparison of oxygen uptake
kinetics during concentric and eccentric cycle exercise.
Journal of Applied Physiology, 91(5), 2135–2142.
doi:10.1152/jappl.2001.91.5.2135
Rogers, M. A., & Evans, W. J. (1993). Changes in skeletal
muscle with aging: Effects of exercise training. Exercise and
Sport Sciences Reviews, 21, 65–102.