Department of Sport and Computer Science, Universidad Pablo de Olavide, 41013 Seville, Spain.
Physical Performance & Sports Research Center, Universidad Pablo de Olavide, 41013 Seville, Spain.
Sensors (Basel). 2024 Oct 5;24(19):6444. doi: 10.3390/s24196444.
This study aimed to analyze the intra-device agreement of a new linear position transducer (Vitruve, VT) and the inter-device agreement with a previously validated linear velocity transducer (T-Force System, TF) in different range of velocities. A group of 50 healthy, physically active men performed a progressive loading test during a bench press (BP) and full-squat (SQ) exercise with a simultaneous recording of two VT and one TF devices. The mean propulsive velocity (MPV) and peak of velocity (PV) were recorded for subsequent analysis. A set of statistics was used to determine the degree of agreement (Intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC], Lin's concordance correlation coefficient [CCC], mean square deviation [MSD], and variance of the difference between measurements [VMD]) and the error magnitude (standard error of measurement [SEM], smallest detectable change [SDC], and maximum errors [ME]) between devices. The established velocity ranges were as follows: >1.20 m·s; 1.20-0.95 m·s; 0.95-0.70 m·s; 0.70-0.45 m·s; ≤0.45 m·s for BP; and >1.50 m·s; 1.50-1.25 m·s; 1.25-1.00 m·s; 1.00-0.75 m·s; and ≤0.75 m·s for SQ. For the MPV, the VT system showed high intra- and inter-device agreement and moderate error magnitude with pooled data in both exercises. However, the level of agreement decreased (ICC: 0.790-0.996; CCC: 0.663-0.992) and the error increased (ME: 2.8-13.4% 1RM; SEM: 0.035-0.01 m·s) as the velocity range increased. For the PV, the magnitude of error was very high in both exercises. In conclusion, our results suggest that the VT system should only be used at MPVs below 0.45 m·s for BP and 0.75 m·s for SQ in order to obtain an accurate and reliable measurement, preferably using the MPV variable instead of the PV. Therefore, it appears that the VT system may not be appropriate for objectively monitoring resistance training and assessing strength performance along the entire spectrum of load-velocity curve.
本研究旨在分析一种新的线性位置传感器(Vitruve,VT)的设备内一致性和与先前验证的线性速度传感器(T-Force 系统,TF)在不同速度范围内的设备间一致性。一组 50 名健康、活跃的男性在卧推(BP)和深蹲(SQ)运动中进行渐进式负荷测试,同时记录两个 VT 和一个 TF 设备的运动数据。随后对平均推进速度(MPV)和速度峰值(PV)进行分析。使用一套统计学方法来确定设备间的一致性程度(组内相关系数[ICC]、林氏一致性相关系数[CCC]、均方偏差[MSD]和测量值之间差异的方差[VMD])和误差幅度(测量标准误差[SEM]、最小可检测变化[SDC]和最大误差[ME])。建立的速度范围如下:BP 为 >1.20 m·s;1.20-0.95 m·s;0.95-0.70 m·s;0.70-0.45 m·s;≤0.45 m·s;SQ 为 >1.50 m·s;1.50-1.25 m·s;1.25-1.00 m·s;1.00-0.75 m·s;≤0.75 m·s。对于 MPV,VT 系统在两种运动中均表现出较高的设备内和设备间一致性以及中等的误差幅度,数据汇总后也是如此。然而,随着速度范围的增加,一致性水平降低(ICC:0.790-0.996;CCC:0.663-0.992),误差增大(ME:2.8-13.4%1RM;SEM:0.035-0.01 m·s)。对于 PV,两种运动的误差幅度都非常高。总之,我们的结果表明,为了获得准确可靠的测量值,VT 系统在 BP 时应仅用于 MPV 低于 0.45 m·s,在 SQ 时应低于 0.75 m·s,最好使用 MPV 变量而不是 PV 变量。因此,VT 系统似乎不适合客观监测抗阻训练和评估整个负荷-速度曲线范围内的力量表现。