Suppr超能文献

跳耸肩和悬垂高拉动作中杠铃速度测量装置的可靠性、有效性及比较

Reliability, Validity, and Comparison of Barbell Velocity Measurement Devices during the Jump Shrug and Hang High Pull.

作者信息

Suchomel Timothy J, Techmanski Baylee S, Kissick Cameron R, Comfort Paul

机构信息

Department of Human Movement Sciences, Carroll University, Waukesha, WI 53186, USA.

Directorate of Sport, Exercise, and Physiotherapy, University of Salford, Salford M6 6PU, UK.

出版信息

J Funct Morphol Kinesiol. 2023 Mar 16;8(1):35. doi: 10.3390/jfmk8010035.

Abstract

This study examined the reliability, potential bias, and practical differences between the GymAware Powertool (GA), Tendo Power Analyzer (TENDO), and Push Band 2.0 (PUSH) during the jump shrug (JS) and hang high pull (HHP) performed across a spectrum of loads. Fifteen resistance-trained men performed JS and HHP repetitions with 20, 40, 60, 80, and 100% of their 1RM hang power clean, and mean (MBV) and peak barbell velocity (PBV) were determined by each velocity measurement device. Least-products regression and Bland-Altman plots were used to examine instances of proportional, fixed, and systematic bias between the TENDO and PUSH compared to the GA. Hedge's effect sizes were also calculated to determine any meaningful differences between devices. The GA and TENDO displayed excellent reliability and acceptable variability during the JS and HHP while the PUSH showed instances of poor-moderate reliability and unacceptable variability at various loads. While the TENDO and PUSH showed instances of various bias, the TENDO device demonstrated greater validity when compared to the GA. Trivial-small differences were shown between the GA and TENDO during the JS and HHP exercises while trivial-moderate differences existed between GA and PUSH during the JS. However, despite trivial-small effects between the GA and PUSH devices at 20 and 40% 1RM during the HHP, practically meaningful differences existed at 60, 80, and 100%, indicating that the PUSH velocity outputs were not accurate. The TENDO appears to be more reliable and valid than the PUSH when measuring MBV and PBV during the JS and HHP.

摘要

本研究考察了GymAware Powertool(GA)、Tendo功率分析仪(TENDO)和Push Band 2.0(PUSH)在不同负荷下进行的耸肩跳(JS)和高翻悬垂(HHP)动作中的可靠性、潜在偏差及实际差异。15名经过抗阻训练的男性以其1RM悬垂力量翻举的20%、40%、60%、80%和100%的负荷进行JS和HHP动作重复,每个速度测量设备测定平均杠铃速度(MBV)和杠铃峰值速度(PBV)。使用最小二乘回归和Bland-Altman图来检验TENDO和PUSH与GA之间的比例偏差、固定偏差和系统偏差情况。还计算了赫奇斯效应量以确定各设备之间是否存在有意义的差异。在JS和HHP动作中,GA和TENDO显示出优异的可靠性和可接受的变异性,而PUSH在不同负荷下表现出中度至较差的可靠性及不可接受的变异性。虽然TENDO和PUSH存在各种偏差情况,但与GA相比,TENDO设备显示出更高的有效性。在JS和HHP动作中,GA和TENDO之间显示出微小至小的差异,而在JS动作中,GA和PUSH之间存在微小至中度的差异。然而,尽管在HHP动作中,GA和PUSH设备在1RM的20%和40%负荷下的效应微小,但在60%、80%和100%负荷下存在实际有意义的差异,表明PUSH的速度输出不准确。在测量JS和HHP动作中的MBV和PBV时,TENDO似乎比PUSH更可靠、更有效。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/f802/10055813/61e2b6a9800e/jfmk-08-00035-g001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验