采用不同计算方法的单腿和双腿着地误差计分系统在各节之间、评分者内部和评分者之间的可靠性比较

Mr Priyankara Manoj Rajakaruna, Associate Professor Yvonne C. Learmonth, Associate Professor Alasdair R. Dempsey
{"title":"采用不同计算方法的单腿和双腿着地误差计分系统在各节之间、评分者内部和评分者之间的可靠性比较","authors":"Mr Priyankara Manoj Rajakaruna, Associate Professor Yvonne C. Learmonth, Associate Professor Alasdair R. Dempsey","doi":"10.31189/2165-7629-13-s2.463","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n \n The Landing Error Scoring System (LESS) is used for screening noncontact anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury risk. The LESS is deemed a valid and reliable indicator of landing biomechanics that predict noncontact ACL injuries. We have sought to validate a Single-Leg Landing Error Scoring System (SLESS) against the established LESS. There are seven distinct calculation methods for final LESS scores, adding variability to the original version and the risk of misinterpreting results. This study used different calculation methods to investigate the inter-session, intra-rater and inter-rater reliability of the SLESS and LESS scores.\n \n \n \n Thirty-five team sports players performed four drop jump landing variations (dominant leg, non-dominant leg, double-leg and cognitive loading drill with double-leg) over three sessions. Sessions 1 and 2 were conducted on the same day, with Session 3 a week later. Video footage from frontal and sagittal views captured all landings. Three professionals scored recorded trials using standard SLESS and LESS protocols. One scorer assessed intra-session and inter-session reliability, while three evaluated inter-rater reliability. The final SLESS and LESS scores were calculated using original version/OG, average of 3 trials-AV, worst trial/WT, best score/BS, first trial/FT, last trial/LT, error present in at least two of three trials/TT). Reliability was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), standard error of measurement (SEM), and coefficient of variation (CV) with 95% confidence intervals.\n \n \n \n The study observed acceptable inter-session reliability across single-leg and double-leg drop jump landing tasks using all seven calculation methods (SLESS: ICC=0.80-0.91, SEM=1.07-1.10, CV=6.5-10.1%; LESS: ICC=0.63-0.90, SEM=1.06-1.11, CV=5.7-11.5%). The study also demonstrated acceptable intra-rater reliability for all tasks using all calculation methods (SLESS: ICC=0.86-0.94, SEM=1.05-1.08, CV=5.0-8.5%; LESS: ICC=0.74-0.93, SEM=1.04-1.08, CV=4.2-8.5%). In addition, acceptable inter-rater reliability was shown for all tasks using all calculation methods (SLESS: ICC=0.69-0.83, SEM=1.11-1.18, CV=10.5-18.0%; LESS: ICC=0.54-0.82, SEM=1.10-1.20, CV=10.3-20.3%).\n \n \n \n The study indicates the reliability of all seven calculation methods for SLESS and LESS scores. Precise specification of the chosen calculation method is crucial for practitioners and researchers.\n","PeriodicalId":92070,"journal":{"name":"Journal of clinical exercise physiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"COMPARISON OF INTER-SESSION, INTRA-RATER AND INTER-RATER RELIABILITY OF SINGLE AND DOUBLE LEG LANDING ERROR SCORING SYSTEM USING DIFFERENT CALCULATION METHODS\",\"authors\":\"Mr Priyankara Manoj Rajakaruna, Associate Professor Yvonne C. Learmonth, Associate Professor Alasdair R. Dempsey\",\"doi\":\"10.31189/2165-7629-13-s2.463\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n \\n The Landing Error Scoring System (LESS) is used for screening noncontact anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury risk. The LESS is deemed a valid and reliable indicator of landing biomechanics that predict noncontact ACL injuries. We have sought to validate a Single-Leg Landing Error Scoring System (SLESS) against the established LESS. There are seven distinct calculation methods for final LESS scores, adding variability to the original version and the risk of misinterpreting results. This study used different calculation methods to investigate the inter-session, intra-rater and inter-rater reliability of the SLESS and LESS scores.\\n \\n \\n \\n Thirty-five team sports players performed four drop jump landing variations (dominant leg, non-dominant leg, double-leg and cognitive loading drill with double-leg) over three sessions. Sessions 1 and 2 were conducted on the same day, with Session 3 a week later. Video footage from frontal and sagittal views captured all landings. Three professionals scored recorded trials using standard SLESS and LESS protocols. One scorer assessed intra-session and inter-session reliability, while three evaluated inter-rater reliability. The final SLESS and LESS scores were calculated using original version/OG, average of 3 trials-AV, worst trial/WT, best score/BS, first trial/FT, last trial/LT, error present in at least two of three trials/TT). Reliability was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), standard error of measurement (SEM), and coefficient of variation (CV) with 95% confidence intervals.\\n \\n \\n \\n The study observed acceptable inter-session reliability across single-leg and double-leg drop jump landing tasks using all seven calculation methods (SLESS: ICC=0.80-0.91, SEM=1.07-1.10, CV=6.5-10.1%; LESS: ICC=0.63-0.90, SEM=1.06-1.11, CV=5.7-11.5%). The study also demonstrated acceptable intra-rater reliability for all tasks using all calculation methods (SLESS: ICC=0.86-0.94, SEM=1.05-1.08, CV=5.0-8.5%; LESS: ICC=0.74-0.93, SEM=1.04-1.08, CV=4.2-8.5%). In addition, acceptable inter-rater reliability was shown for all tasks using all calculation methods (SLESS: ICC=0.69-0.83, SEM=1.11-1.18, CV=10.5-18.0%; LESS: ICC=0.54-0.82, SEM=1.10-1.20, CV=10.3-20.3%).\\n \\n \\n \\n The study indicates the reliability of all seven calculation methods for SLESS and LESS scores. Precise specification of the chosen calculation method is crucial for practitioners and researchers.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":92070,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of clinical exercise physiology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of clinical exercise physiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.31189/2165-7629-13-s2.463\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of clinical exercise physiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31189/2165-7629-13-s2.463","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

着地误差评分系统(LESS)用于筛查非接触性前十字韧带(ACL)损伤风险。LESS 被认为是预测非接触性前交叉韧带损伤的着地生物力学的有效可靠指标。我们试图将单腿着地误差评分系统(SLESS)与既定的 LESS 进行对比验证。LESS 的最终得分有七种不同的计算方法,这增加了原始版本的可变性和误读结果的风险。本研究采用了不同的计算方法来研究 SLESS 和 LESS 分数在训练间、训练者内部和训练者之间的可靠性。 35 名团队运动运动员在三次训练中进行了四次落体跳着地变化(优势腿、非优势腿、双腿和双腿认知负荷训练)。第一和第二节在同一天进行,第三节在一周后进行。正面和矢状视角的录像记录了所有着地动作。三名专业人员使用标准的 SLESS 和 LESS 协议对记录的试验进行评分。其中一名评分员评估了测试过程中和测试过程间的可靠性,三名评分员评估了评分员之间的可靠性。SLESS 和 LESS 的最终得分是通过原始版本/OG、三次试验的平均值-AV、最差试验/WT、最佳得分/BS、第一次试验/FT、最后一次试验/LT、三次试验中至少两次出现错误/TT)计算得出的。使用类内相关系数(ICC)、测量标准误差(SEM)和变异系数(CV)以及 95% 的置信区间对可靠性进行评估。 研究观察到,使用所有七种计算方法完成单腿和双腿下蹲跳着地任务时,各阶段间的可靠性均可接受(SLESS:ICC=0.80-0.91,SEM=1.07-1.10,CV=6.5-10.1%;LESS:ICC=0.63-0.90,SEM=1.06-1.11,CV=5.7-11.5%)。研究还表明,使用所有计算方法完成所有任务的评分者内部信度均可接受(SLESS:ICC=0.86-0.94,SEM=1.05-1.08,CV=5.0-8.5%;LESS:ICC=0.74-0.93,SEM=1.04-1.08,CV=4.2-8.5%)。此外,使用所有计算方法完成所有任务时,评分者之间的可靠性均可接受(SLESS:ICC=0.69-0.83,SEM=1.11-1.18,CV=10.5-18.0%;LESS:ICC=0.54-0.82,SEM=1.10-1.20,CV=10.3-20.3%)。 研究表明,SLESS 和 LESS 分数的所有七种计算方法都是可靠的。对从业人员和研究人员来说,精确指定所选计算方法至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
COMPARISON OF INTER-SESSION, INTRA-RATER AND INTER-RATER RELIABILITY OF SINGLE AND DOUBLE LEG LANDING ERROR SCORING SYSTEM USING DIFFERENT CALCULATION METHODS
The Landing Error Scoring System (LESS) is used for screening noncontact anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury risk. The LESS is deemed a valid and reliable indicator of landing biomechanics that predict noncontact ACL injuries. We have sought to validate a Single-Leg Landing Error Scoring System (SLESS) against the established LESS. There are seven distinct calculation methods for final LESS scores, adding variability to the original version and the risk of misinterpreting results. This study used different calculation methods to investigate the inter-session, intra-rater and inter-rater reliability of the SLESS and LESS scores. Thirty-five team sports players performed four drop jump landing variations (dominant leg, non-dominant leg, double-leg and cognitive loading drill with double-leg) over three sessions. Sessions 1 and 2 were conducted on the same day, with Session 3 a week later. Video footage from frontal and sagittal views captured all landings. Three professionals scored recorded trials using standard SLESS and LESS protocols. One scorer assessed intra-session and inter-session reliability, while three evaluated inter-rater reliability. The final SLESS and LESS scores were calculated using original version/OG, average of 3 trials-AV, worst trial/WT, best score/BS, first trial/FT, last trial/LT, error present in at least two of three trials/TT). Reliability was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), standard error of measurement (SEM), and coefficient of variation (CV) with 95% confidence intervals. The study observed acceptable inter-session reliability across single-leg and double-leg drop jump landing tasks using all seven calculation methods (SLESS: ICC=0.80-0.91, SEM=1.07-1.10, CV=6.5-10.1%; LESS: ICC=0.63-0.90, SEM=1.06-1.11, CV=5.7-11.5%). The study also demonstrated acceptable intra-rater reliability for all tasks using all calculation methods (SLESS: ICC=0.86-0.94, SEM=1.05-1.08, CV=5.0-8.5%; LESS: ICC=0.74-0.93, SEM=1.04-1.08, CV=4.2-8.5%). In addition, acceptable inter-rater reliability was shown for all tasks using all calculation methods (SLESS: ICC=0.69-0.83, SEM=1.11-1.18, CV=10.5-18.0%; LESS: ICC=0.54-0.82, SEM=1.10-1.20, CV=10.3-20.3%). The study indicates the reliability of all seven calculation methods for SLESS and LESS scores. Precise specification of the chosen calculation method is crucial for practitioners and researchers.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Effects of 12 Months of Kettlebell Training on an Individual with Myasthenia Gravis Effective Manuscript Writing: A Learned Process Cardiorespiratory Effects of Tai Chi Versus Walking: Exploratory Data from the LEAP Trial Stroke, Step Count, and Alzheimer’s ECG Characteristics of Young High School Athletes in Northwest Florida
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1