两种方法估计肩部次极大等距收缩时目标肌力的准确性。

IF 1.6 Q3 SPORT SCIENCES International Journal of Sports Physical Therapy Pub Date : 2025-01-02 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.26603/001c.127141
Sean F Griech, Christos Karagiannopoulos
{"title":"两种方法估计肩部次极大等距收缩时目标肌力的准确性。","authors":"Sean F Griech, Christos Karagiannopoulos","doi":"10.26603/001c.127141","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Submaximal isometric exercises are used for pain control and neuromuscular facilitation. Typically, an ipsilateral maximal voluntary isometric contraction (MVIC) is used as a reference; however, when this is not clinically feasible, an alternative must be considered. Two options are (1) the no reference (NR) method (submaximal contraction at a self-perceived effort level without reference) and (2) the reciprocal reference (RR) method (MVIC on the contralateral side serves as a reference for a submaximal effort-level on the ipsilateral side). No research evidence exists as to which alternative method is more accurate at the shoulder.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To determine the accuracy of the NR and RR methods in estimating target muscle force during shoulder ER and IR submaximal isometric contractions among healthy adults.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>Observational cross-sectional.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Isometric shoulder force was measured via a hand-held dynamometer on 48 healthy participants (36 females and 12 males) mean age of 27.4 ±1.6 years. Both methods (NR and RR), direction of force (IR and ER), and starting test-side (right or left) were randomized. RR testing involved a contralateral MVIC (reference) prior to a 50% submaximal contraction. NR testing entailed a 50% submaximal contraction with no prior reference MVIC.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Actual submaximal efforts were compared to MVIC-based estimated submaximal efforts. Significant moderate - good correlations existed for both the RR (r = 0.691) and NR (r = 0.620) methods, regardless of test-side or shoulder motion. Significant moderate - good correlations were found between both methods for both ER [RR (r = 0.717) and NR (r = 0.614)] and IR [RR (r = 0.669) and NR (r = 0.628)].</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Both methods had moderate - good accuracy levels and were not influenced by the test side or direction of force. Either method (RR or NR) can be equally useful for shoulder isometric exercise prescription when an ipsilateral reference cannot be determined.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>3.</p>","PeriodicalId":47892,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Sports Physical Therapy","volume":"20 1","pages":"79-86"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11697993/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Accuracy of Two Methods in Estimating Target Muscle Force During Shoulder Submaximal Isometric Contractions.\",\"authors\":\"Sean F Griech, Christos Karagiannopoulos\",\"doi\":\"10.26603/001c.127141\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Submaximal isometric exercises are used for pain control and neuromuscular facilitation. Typically, an ipsilateral maximal voluntary isometric contraction (MVIC) is used as a reference; however, when this is not clinically feasible, an alternative must be considered. Two options are (1) the no reference (NR) method (submaximal contraction at a self-perceived effort level without reference) and (2) the reciprocal reference (RR) method (MVIC on the contralateral side serves as a reference for a submaximal effort-level on the ipsilateral side). No research evidence exists as to which alternative method is more accurate at the shoulder.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To determine the accuracy of the NR and RR methods in estimating target muscle force during shoulder ER and IR submaximal isometric contractions among healthy adults.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>Observational cross-sectional.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Isometric shoulder force was measured via a hand-held dynamometer on 48 healthy participants (36 females and 12 males) mean age of 27.4 ±1.6 years. Both methods (NR and RR), direction of force (IR and ER), and starting test-side (right or left) were randomized. RR testing involved a contralateral MVIC (reference) prior to a 50% submaximal contraction. NR testing entailed a 50% submaximal contraction with no prior reference MVIC.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Actual submaximal efforts were compared to MVIC-based estimated submaximal efforts. Significant moderate - good correlations existed for both the RR (r = 0.691) and NR (r = 0.620) methods, regardless of test-side or shoulder motion. Significant moderate - good correlations were found between both methods for both ER [RR (r = 0.717) and NR (r = 0.614)] and IR [RR (r = 0.669) and NR (r = 0.628)].</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Both methods had moderate - good accuracy levels and were not influenced by the test side or direction of force. Either method (RR or NR) can be equally useful for shoulder isometric exercise prescription when an ipsilateral reference cannot be determined.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>3.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47892,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Sports Physical Therapy\",\"volume\":\"20 1\",\"pages\":\"79-86\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11697993/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Sports Physical Therapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.26603/001c.127141\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"SPORT SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Sports Physical Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.26603/001c.127141","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SPORT SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:亚最大等长运动用于疼痛控制和神经肌肉促进。通常,同侧最大自主等距收缩(MVIC)被用作参考;然而,当这在临床上不可行时,必须考虑另一种选择。两种选择是(1)无参考(NR)方法(在没有参考的情况下,在自我感知的努力水平上进行次极大收缩)和(2)相互参考(RR)方法(对侧的MVIC作为同侧次极大努力水平的参考)。没有研究证据表明哪一种方法在肩部更准确。目的:确定NR和RR方法在估计健康成人肩部ER和IR次最大等距收缩时目标肌力的准确性。研究设计:观察性横断面。方法:采用手持式测力仪测量48例健康受试者(女性36例,男性12例)肩力,平均年龄27.4±1.6岁。两种方法(NR和RR)、用力方向(IR和ER)和开始测试侧(右或左)随机化。RR测试包括对侧MVIC(参考)在50%次最大收缩之前。NR测试需要50%的亚最大收缩,没有事先参考MVIC。结果:将实际次最大努力与基于mvic的估计次最大努力进行比较。无论测试侧或肩部运动如何,RR (r = 0.691)和NR (r = 0.620)方法均存在显著的中度-良好相关性。两种方法的ER [RR (r = 0.717)和NR (r = 0.614)]和IR [RR (r = 0.669)和NR (r = 0.628)]之间存在显著的中良性相关。结论:两种方法均具有中佳的准确度水平,且不受试验侧边和受力方向的影响。当不能确定同侧参考时,两种方法(RR或NR)对肩部等距运动处方同样有用。证据等级:3。
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
Accuracy of Two Methods in Estimating Target Muscle Force During Shoulder Submaximal Isometric Contractions.

Background: Submaximal isometric exercises are used for pain control and neuromuscular facilitation. Typically, an ipsilateral maximal voluntary isometric contraction (MVIC) is used as a reference; however, when this is not clinically feasible, an alternative must be considered. Two options are (1) the no reference (NR) method (submaximal contraction at a self-perceived effort level without reference) and (2) the reciprocal reference (RR) method (MVIC on the contralateral side serves as a reference for a submaximal effort-level on the ipsilateral side). No research evidence exists as to which alternative method is more accurate at the shoulder.

Purpose: To determine the accuracy of the NR and RR methods in estimating target muscle force during shoulder ER and IR submaximal isometric contractions among healthy adults.

Study design: Observational cross-sectional.

Methods: Isometric shoulder force was measured via a hand-held dynamometer on 48 healthy participants (36 females and 12 males) mean age of 27.4 ±1.6 years. Both methods (NR and RR), direction of force (IR and ER), and starting test-side (right or left) were randomized. RR testing involved a contralateral MVIC (reference) prior to a 50% submaximal contraction. NR testing entailed a 50% submaximal contraction with no prior reference MVIC.

Results: Actual submaximal efforts were compared to MVIC-based estimated submaximal efforts. Significant moderate - good correlations existed for both the RR (r = 0.691) and NR (r = 0.620) methods, regardless of test-side or shoulder motion. Significant moderate - good correlations were found between both methods for both ER [RR (r = 0.717) and NR (r = 0.614)] and IR [RR (r = 0.669) and NR (r = 0.628)].

Conclusion: Both methods had moderate - good accuracy levels and were not influenced by the test side or direction of force. Either method (RR or NR) can be equally useful for shoulder isometric exercise prescription when an ipsilateral reference cannot be determined.

Level of evidence: 3.

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
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
5.90%
发文量
124
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊最新文献
Effectiveness of Vestibular Rehabilitation in Children Post-Concussion: A Systematic Review. Patellofemoral Joint Loading During Bodyweight One-Legged and Two-Legged BOSU and Floor Squats. Reliability of Ultrasound Based Compressibility of the Lower Leg Anterior Tibial Muscle Compartment in Healthy Volunteers. The Effect of the Addition of Core Exercises to Supervised Physiotherapy in Patients With Subacromial Impingement Syndrome. The Effects of Noxious Electrical Stimulation and Eccentric Exercise on Mechanical and Thermal Pain Sensitivity in Recreational Runners with Achilles Tendinopathy.
×
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