Department of Kinesiology and Applied Physiology, University of Delaware, Newark, Delaware, USA.
J Strength Cond Res. 2013 Jun;27(6):1568-78. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e3182711e21.
Although widely used, the standard strength test (SST) is known to provide moderate correlations with functional measures, while being based on sustained maximum forces and a relatively large number of trials. The aim of this study was to compare the concurrent (with respect to SST) and external validity (with respect to the standard balance and maximum power output tests) of 2 alternate tests of neuromuscular function based on brief isometric actions. The first test provides a slope between the rates of torque development (RTD) and peak torques (T) measured from a number of consecutive rapid actions performed across a wide range of T levels (brief force pulses, BFP). The second test (alternating consecutive maximum contractions, ACMC) provides T and RTD from multiple cycles of rapid alternating maximum actions of 2 antagonistic muscle groups. The results obtained from 29 young and healthy subjects revealed moderate-to-high concurrent validity of ACMC (median r = 0.56, p < 0.05) and its similar, if not higher external validity than SST. Conversely, both the concurrent and external validity of BFP seemed to be relatively low (r = 0.23, p > 0.05). Because ACMC could also have advantage over SST by being based on somewhat lower and transitional muscle forces exerted and fewer trials are needed for testing 2 antagonistic muscles, the authors conclude that ACMC could be considered as either an alternative or complementary test to SST for testing the ability for rapid exertion of maximum forces. Conversely, BFP may offer a measure of the neuromuscular system "as a whole" that is complementary to SST by providing outcomes that are relatively independent of muscle size and function.
尽管标准强度测试（SST）被广泛应用，但已知其与功能测量的相关性适中，而其基础是持续的最大力量和相对较多的试验次数。本研究旨在比较基于短暂等长动作的两种替代神经肌肉功能测试的同时有效性（相对于 SST）和外部有效性（相对于标准平衡和最大输出功率测试）。第一种测试提供了在一系列广泛的 T 水平下（短暂力脉冲，BFP）从多个连续快速动作中测量的扭矩发展率（RTD）和峰值扭矩（T）之间的斜率。第二种测试（交替连续最大收缩，ACMC）提供了来自两个拮抗肌群的快速交替最大动作的多个循环的 T 和 RTD。从 29 名年轻健康的受试者中获得的结果表明，ACMC 的同时有效性为中度至高度（中位数 r = 0.56，p < 0.05），其外部有效性与 SST 相似，如果不高于 SST。相反，BFP 的同时有效性和外部有效性似乎相对较低（r = 0.23，p > 0.05）。由于 ACMC 还可以通过基于较低和过渡性肌肉力量以及较少的试验次数来测试两个拮抗肌群的优势，相对于 SST，作者得出结论，ACMC 可以被认为是替代或补充 SST 的测试，用于测试快速施加最大力量的能力。相反，BFP 可以通过提供相对独立于肌肉大小和功能的结果，提供对 SST 的补充，从而提供对整个神经肌肉系统的测量。
