Departments of Training Science; and.
Biomechanics, Kinesiology and Computer Science in Sport, Center for Sport Science and University Sports, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
J Strength Cond Res. 2021 Aug 1;35(8):2170-2178. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000003143.
Mitter, B, Hölbling, D, Bauer, P, Stöckl, M, Baca, A, and Tschan, H. Concurrent validity of field-based diagnostic technology monitoring movement velocity in powerlifting exercises. J Strength Cond Res 35(8): 2170-2178, 2021-The study was designed to investigate the validity of different technologies used to determine movement velocity in resistance training. Twenty-four experienced powerlifters (18 male and 6 female; age, 25.1 ± 5.1 years) completed a progressive loading test in the squat, bench press, and conventional deadlift until reaching their 1 repetition maximum. Peak and mean velocity were simultaneously recorded with 4 field-based systems: GymAware (GA), FitroDyne (FD), PUSH (PU), and Beast Sensor (BS). 3D motion capturing was used to calculate specific gold standard trajectory references for each device. GA provided the most accurate output across exercises (r = 0.99-1, ES = -0.05 to 0.1). FD showed similar results for peak velocity (r = 1, standardized mean bias [ES] = -0.1 to -0.02) but considerably less validity for mean velocity (r = 0.92-0.95, ES = -0.57 to -0.29). Reasonably valid to highly valid output was provided by PU in all exercises (r = 0.91-0.97, ES = -0.5 to 0.28) and by BS in the bench press and for mean velocity in the squat (r = 0.87-0.96, ES = -0.5 to -0.06). However, BS did not reach the thresholds for reasonable validity in the deadlift and for peak velocity in the squat, mostly due to high standardized mean bias (ES = -0.78 to -0.63). In conclusion, different technologies should not be used interchangeably. Practitioners who require negligible measurement error in their assessment of movement velocity are advised to use linear position transducers over inertial sensors.
米特、B、霍尔布林、D、鲍尔、P、施托克、M、巴卡、A 和特沙恩、H. 基于场的诊断技术监测举重练习中运动速度的同时效度。J 力量与条件研究 35(8):2170-2178, 2021-该研究旨在调查用于确定阻力训练中运动速度的不同技术的有效性。24 名经验丰富的举重运动员（18 名男性和 6 名女性；年龄，25.1 ± 5.1 岁）完成了深蹲、卧推和传统硬拉的渐进式加载测试，直到达到 1 次最大重复次数。峰值和平均速度同时使用 4 个基于场地的系统记录：GymAware (GA)、FitroDyne (FD)、PUSH (PU) 和 Beast Sensor (BS)。3D 运动捕捉用于为每个设备计算特定的黄金标准轨迹参考。GA 在所有练习中提供最准确的输出（r = 0.99-1，ES = -0.05 至 0.1）。FD 对峰值速度显示出类似的结果（r = 1，标准化平均偏差 [ES] = -0.1 至 -0.02），但平均速度的有效性较低（r = 0.92-0.95，ES = -0.57 至 -0.29）。PU 在所有练习中提供合理有效至高度有效的输出（r = 0.91-0.97，ES = -0.5 至 0.28），BS 在卧推和深蹲的平均速度中提供合理有效至高度有效的输出（r = 0.87-0.96，ES = -0.5 至 -0.06）。然而，BS 没有达到在硬拉中对峰值速度和在深蹲中对平均速度的合理有效性阈值，主要是由于标准化平均偏差高（ES = -0.78 至 -0.63）。总之，不同的技术不应互换使用。建议在评估运动速度时需要微小测量误差的从业者使用线性位置传感器而不是惯性传感器。
