伸展和弯曲膝关节小腿肌肉的等长最大强度与一次重复最大强度的关系

Konstantin Warneke, M. Hillebrecht, K. Wirth, S. Schiemann, Michael Keiner
{"title":"伸展和弯曲膝关节小腿肌肉的等长最大强度与一次重复最大强度的关系","authors":"Konstantin Warneke, M. Hillebrecht, K. Wirth, S. Schiemann, Michael Keiner","doi":"10.24985/ijass.2022.34.1.61","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Previous research points out high relevance of maximal strength measurement in the diagnostics of different populations. However, there is inconsistency in procedures of maximum strength measurements. Thus, it must be questioned whether the results from different studies are actually comparable. Due to the aforementioned problems in standardization, the aim of this study was to assess correlations between and reproducibility of isometric and dynamic strength testing. Since there are many studies investigating maximal strength in the calf muscles, this study will examine the plantar flexors. For this purpose, 87 active participants were recruited (m: 52, f: 35, age: 28.3 ± 5.5 years, range 18-38 years, height: 178.3 ± 6.6 cm, weight: 81.5 ± 7.4 kg) who performed maximal isometric strength testing and dynamic 1RM testing in plantar flexion both with extended and bended knee joint. Pearson correlation as well as concordance correlation coefficient (CCC) were determined. In literature, CCC is used to determine reproducibility between two different testing methods. There were correlation coefficients of r = 0.63 – 0.77 and ρc=0.62 ‒ 0.77. Results are comparable with correlations between maximal isometric strength and 1-RM in previous studies in different movements. In consideration of CCC, isometric strength testing and 1RM seem to not measure the same parameter, therefore comparison of results measured with different procedures seems difficult. Our results exhibit a high influence of isometric maximal strength on 1RM performance. However, 1RM tests cannot be replaced by isometric strength testing. Care must be taken due to standardization of procedure when comparing results from different studies and, especially, if 1RM testing should be replaced with isometric strength measurement.","PeriodicalId":93448,"journal":{"name":"International journal of applied sports sciences : IJASS","volume":"22 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Correlation between Isometric Maximum Strength and One Repetition Maximum in the Calf Muscle in Extended and Bended Knee Joint\",\"authors\":\"Konstantin Warneke, M. Hillebrecht, K. Wirth, S. Schiemann, Michael Keiner\",\"doi\":\"10.24985/ijass.2022.34.1.61\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Previous research points out high relevance of maximal strength measurement in the diagnostics of different populations. However, there is inconsistency in procedures of maximum strength measurements. Thus, it must be questioned whether the results from different studies are actually comparable. Due to the aforementioned problems in standardization, the aim of this study was to assess correlations between and reproducibility of isometric and dynamic strength testing. Since there are many studies investigating maximal strength in the calf muscles, this study will examine the plantar flexors. For this purpose, 87 active participants were recruited (m: 52, f: 35, age: 28.3 ± 5.5 years, range 18-38 years, height: 178.3 ± 6.6 cm, weight: 81.5 ± 7.4 kg) who performed maximal isometric strength testing and dynamic 1RM testing in plantar flexion both with extended and bended knee joint. Pearson correlation as well as concordance correlation coefficient (CCC) were determined. In literature, CCC is used to determine reproducibility between two different testing methods. There were correlation coefficients of r = 0.63 – 0.77 and ρc=0.62 ‒ 0.77. Results are comparable with correlations between maximal isometric strength and 1-RM in previous studies in different movements. In consideration of CCC, isometric strength testing and 1RM seem to not measure the same parameter, therefore comparison of results measured with different procedures seems difficult. Our results exhibit a high influence of isometric maximal strength on 1RM performance. However, 1RM tests cannot be replaced by isometric strength testing. Care must be taken due to standardization of procedure when comparing results from different studies and, especially, if 1RM testing should be replaced with isometric strength measurement.\",\"PeriodicalId\":93448,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International journal of applied sports sciences : IJASS\",\"volume\":\"22 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International journal of applied sports sciences : IJASS\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.24985/ijass.2022.34.1.61\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of applied sports sciences : IJASS","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24985/ijass.2022.34.1.61","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

摘要

以往的研究指出,最大强度测量在不同人群的诊断中具有很高的相关性。然而,在最大强度测量的程序中存在不一致。因此,不同研究的结果是否具有可比性是值得质疑的。由于上述标准化方面的问题,本研究的目的是评估等长强度和动态强度试验之间的相关性和可重复性。由于有许多研究调查了小腿肌肉的最大力量,本研究将研究足底屈肌。为此,我们招募了87名积极参与者(男52人,女35人,年龄28.3±5.5岁,年龄18-38岁,身高178.3±6.6 cm,体重81.5±7.4 kg),进行了膝关节伸展和弯曲时足底屈曲的最大等距力量测试和动态1RM测试。测定Pearson相关和一致性相关系数(CCC)。在文献中,CCC被用来确定两种不同测试方法之间的可重复性。相关系数r = 0.63 ~ 0.77, ρc=0.62 ~ 0.77。结果与先前不同运动中最大等长强度和1-RM之间的相关性相当。考虑到CCC,等距强度测试和1RM似乎测量的不是相同的参数,因此用不同的方法测量的结果比较起来很困难。我们的研究结果表明,等长最大强度对1RM性能的影响很大。但是,1RM测试不能被等距强度测试所取代。在比较不同研究的结果时,由于程序的标准化,特别是当1RM测试应该用等距强度测量代替时,必须小心。
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
Correlation between Isometric Maximum Strength and One Repetition Maximum in the Calf Muscle in Extended and Bended Knee Joint
Previous research points out high relevance of maximal strength measurement in the diagnostics of different populations. However, there is inconsistency in procedures of maximum strength measurements. Thus, it must be questioned whether the results from different studies are actually comparable. Due to the aforementioned problems in standardization, the aim of this study was to assess correlations between and reproducibility of isometric and dynamic strength testing. Since there are many studies investigating maximal strength in the calf muscles, this study will examine the plantar flexors. For this purpose, 87 active participants were recruited (m: 52, f: 35, age: 28.3 ± 5.5 years, range 18-38 years, height: 178.3 ± 6.6 cm, weight: 81.5 ± 7.4 kg) who performed maximal isometric strength testing and dynamic 1RM testing in plantar flexion both with extended and bended knee joint. Pearson correlation as well as concordance correlation coefficient (CCC) were determined. In literature, CCC is used to determine reproducibility between two different testing methods. There were correlation coefficients of r = 0.63 – 0.77 and ρc=0.62 ‒ 0.77. Results are comparable with correlations between maximal isometric strength and 1-RM in previous studies in different movements. In consideration of CCC, isometric strength testing and 1RM seem to not measure the same parameter, therefore comparison of results measured with different procedures seems difficult. Our results exhibit a high influence of isometric maximal strength on 1RM performance. However, 1RM tests cannot be replaced by isometric strength testing. Care must be taken due to standardization of procedure when comparing results from different studies and, especially, if 1RM testing should be replaced with isometric strength measurement.
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
“Why Can’t We Be Friends”? An Examination of Academic and Industry Alignment in Sport Sponsorship From Viewers to Participants: Analyzing the Mediating Effect of Women Viewers’ Satisfaction between Sportainment Show Team Identification and Intention to Participate in Sports Development of an Evidence-Based Exercise Program for Childhood Cancer Survivors: A Feasibility and Pilot Study Physical Theater Class Experiences: Mental Health, Play, and the Love of Movement A Study on Negative Human Rights-Related Experiences of Female College Student Athletes in South Korea
×
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