Mangine Gerald T, Hines Ashley, Grazer Jacob, Esmat Tiffany A, McLester John
Exercise Science and Sport Management, Kennesaw State University, Kennesaw, Georgia.
J Strength Cond Res. 2025 Feb 1;39(2):147-155. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000004971. Epub 2024 Oct 24.
Mangine, GT, Hines, A, Grazer, J, Esmat, TA, and McLester, J. Can video annotation software with minimal standardization be used as a back-up for a marker-free motion tracking system when monitoring barbell thruster velocity during a repeated circuit? J Strength Cond Res 39(2): 147-155, 2025-This study examined the agreement between a marker-free motion tracking system (PERCH) and a free video annotation software (KINOVEA) for measuring barbell thruster velocity using minimal standardization. For a larger placebo-controlled supplement intervention, 10 men (28.7 ± 8.0 years, 175 ± 8 cm, 91.0 ± 12.0 kg) and 10 women (31.3 ± 5.2 years, 167 ± 4 cm, 70 ± 13 kg) completed a circuit of rowing, 6 barbell thrusters (men: 43.1 kg, women: 29.5 kg), and 3 box jumps for "as many repetitions as possible" (AMRAP) in either 5 or 15 minutes. Barbell velocity (m × second -1 ) was monitored by PERCH from the frontal plane, whereas all sessions were video recorded from the same view and subsequently analyzed by KINOVEA using natural barbell landmarks. Fifty repetitions were randomly and equally drawn from each participant ( n = 1,000 repetitions) across all workout and supplement conditions. Although Wilcoxon signed-rank test revealed no differences (mean difference = 0.03 m × second -1 , p = 0.332), KINOVEA only explained 2.6% of PERCH variance, and Spearman's correlation analysis of Bland-Altman plots suggested that differences between technologies were exacerbated by the magnitude of velocity ( ρ = -0.62, p < 0.001). Cross-validated, regression analysis using KINOVEA and readily available participant demographics (arm reach and biological sex) improved prediction by 13.4% but agreement remained inconsistent ( ρ = 0.73, p < 0.001). Neither KINOVEA nor KINOVEA combined with participant demographics are interchangeable with PERCH for monitoring barbell velocity during an AMRAP. Still, researchers and athletes might use this free and accessible software as back-up for whenever PERCH fails to detect repetitions, as some information is better than none.
曼金内、GT、海因斯、A、格拉泽、J、埃斯马特、TA和麦克莱斯特、J。在重复循环中监测杠铃推举速度时，标准化程度最低的视频注释软件能否用作无标记运动跟踪系统的备用工具？《力量与体能研究杂志》39(2): 147 - 155，2025年——本研究检验了无标记运动跟踪系统（PERCH）和免费视频注释软件（KINOVEA）在使用最低标准化程度测量杠铃推举速度方面的一致性。在一项更大规模的安慰剂对照补充剂干预研究中，10名男性（28.7±8.0岁，175±8厘米，91.0±12.0千克）和10名女性（31.3±5.2岁，167±4厘米，70±13千克）在5分钟或15分钟内完成了一轮划船、6次杠铃推举（男性：43.1千克，女性：29.5千克）和3次箱式跳跃的“尽可能多重复次数”（AMRAP）训练。PERCH从正面平面监测杠铃速度（米×秒⁻¹），而所有训练过程均从相同视角进行视频录制，随后由KINOVEA使用自然杠铃标志点进行分析。在所有训练和补充剂条件下，从每位参与者中随机且平均抽取50次重复动作（n = 1000次重复动作）。尽管威尔科克森符号秩检验未发现差异（平均差异 = 0.03米×秒⁻¹，p = 0.332），但KINOVEA仅解释了PERCH方差的2.6%，布兰德 - 奥特曼图的斯皮尔曼相关性分析表明，技术之间的差异因速度大小而加剧（ρ = -0.62，p < 0.001）。使用KINOVEA和易于获取的参与者人口统计学数据（手臂伸展长度和生物学性别）进行交叉验证的回归分析使预测提高了13.4%，但一致性仍然不一致（ρ = 0.73，p < 0.001）。在AMRAP期间监测杠铃速度时，KINOVEA及其与参与者人口统计学数据的组合均不能与PERCH互换使用。尽管如此，研究人员和运动员可能会在PERCH无法检测到重复动作时，将这款免费且易于获取的软件用作备用工具，因为有一些信息总比没有好。
