壶铃摆动 1 次和 5 次最大重复次数的可靠性。

Reliability of kettlebell swing one and five repetition maximum.

机构信息

School of Behavioural and Health Sciences, Australian Catholic University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.

Faculty of Health Sciences and Medicine, Institute of Health & Sport, Bond University, Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia.

出版信息

PeerJ. 2022 Nov 21;10:e14370. doi: 10.7717/peerj.14370. eCollection 2022.

DOI:10.7717/peerj.14370

PMID:36438579

原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9686413/

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Research into the kettlebell swing has increased in the last decade. There has been a paucity of literature assessing an individual's ability to perform the kettlebell swing exercise. The purpose of this study was to determine the test-retest reliability of the one and five repetition maximum (1RM and 5RM) kettlebell swing.

MATERIALS & METHODS: Twenty four recreational resistance-trained participants performed an isometric mid-thigh pull (IMTP) and two familiarization sessions followed by three test sessions for each RM load approximately one week apart, using a custom-built plate-loaded kettlebell. On each test occasion, subjects completed a series of warm-up sets followed by 3-4 progressively heavier kettlebell swings to a standardized height until 1RM or 5RM was reached. Test-retest reliability was calculated using the intra-class correlation (ICC) and typical error was represented as the coefficient of variation (CV%) with 90% confidence limits (90% CL). The smallest worthwhile change (SWC%) representing the smallest change of practical importance, was calculated as 0.2 × between-subject standard deviation. The relationship of kettlebell swing performance and maximum strength was determined by Pearson correlation with ±90% CL between the absolute peak force recorded during IMTP and 1RM or 5RM.

RESULTS

Results demonstrated a high test-retest reliability for both the 1RM (ICC = 0.97, 90% CL [0.95-0.99]; CV = 2.7%, 90% CL [2.2-3.7%]) and 5RM (ICC = 0.98, 90% CL [0.96-0.99]; CV = 2.4%, 90% CL [1.9-3.3%]), respectively. The CV% was lower than the SWC for both the 1RM (SWC = 2.8%, 90% CL [1.9-3.5]) and 5RM (SWC = 2.9%, 90% CL [1.9-3.6]) kettlebell swing. The correlation between IMTP absolute peak force and the 1RM (r = 0.69, 90% CL 0.43-0.83) was large and very large for the 5RM (r = 0.75, 90% CL [0.55-0.87]).

CONCLUSIONS

These results demonstrate the stability of 1RM and 5RM kettlebell swing performance after two familiarization sessions. Practitioners can be confident that changes in kettlebell swing 1RM and 5RM performance of >3.6 kg represent a practically important difference, which is the upper limit of the 90% CL.

摘要

背景

过去十年，对壶铃摆动的研究有所增加。评估个体进行壶铃摆动运动能力的文献相对较少。本研究的目的是确定 1RM 和 5RM 壶铃摆动的测试-重测信度。

材料与方法

24 名有经验的抗阻训练参与者进行等长大腿中部拉伸（IMTP）和两次熟悉训练，然后在大约一周的时间内，使用定制的板式壶铃进行三次 RM 负荷测试。在每次测试中，受试者先完成一组热身运动，然后进行 3-4 组逐渐加重的壶铃摆动，直到达到 1RM 或 5RM。使用组内相关系数（ICC）计算测试-重测信度，典型误差表示为变异系数（CV%），置信区间为 90%（90% CL）。最小有意义变化（SWC%）代表实际重要性的最小变化，计算为 0.2×组间标准差。通过 Pearson 相关性确定壶铃摆动表现与最大力量之间的关系，IMTP 期间记录的绝对峰值力与 1RM 或 5RM 的±90% CL 之间的关系。

结果

结果表明，1RM（ICC = 0.97，90% CL [0.95-0.99]；CV = 2.7%，90% CL [2.2-3.7%]）和 5RM（ICC = 0.98，90% CL [0.96-0.99]；CV = 2.4%，90% CL [1.9-3.3%]）的测试-重测信度均较高。1RM（SWC = 2.8%，90% CL [1.9-3.5]）和 5RM（SWC = 2.9%，90% CL [1.9-3.6]）的 CV%均低于 SWC。IMTP 绝对峰值力与 1RM 的相关性较大（r = 0.69，90% CL 0.43-0.83），与 5RM 的相关性非常大（r = 0.75，90% CL [0.55-0.87]）。