Job Trey D W, Cross Matthew R, Cronin John B
Athlete Training and Health, Spring, TX, USA.
Sports Performance Research Institute New Zealand, Auckland, New Zealand.
J Sport Rehabil. 2024 Dec 11;34(5):492-498. doi: 10.1123/jsr.2024-0150. Print 2025 Jul 1.
Advancements in portable load-cell technology have enabled high-quality assessment of shoulder internal (IR) and external rotation (ER) peak force (Fmax) and rate of force development (RFD). This study's purpose was to explore the reliability and differences between IR and ER Fmax and RFD in different testing positions using a novel load-cell device.
A within-subjects repeated-measures design was employed to compare the intersession values and reliability of Fmax and RFD for both shoulder IR and ER across 3 positions: seated-0°, supine-0° and supine-90°.
National-level swimmers (n = 19; age = 16.8 [1.0] y) completed 3 testing occasions of each condition (combination of arm, rotation, and test position) separated by 7 to 14 days.
IR superseded ER in all testing positions. The association between these positions across IR and ER was typically strong for both Fmax and RFD (r > .85, P < .001) except for IR RFD (r = .56-.73, P < .05). For sessions 2 to 3, Fmax intraclass correlation coefficient and CV (intraclass correlation coefficient = .89-.96, CV = 5.2%-8.8%) were typically within acceptable ranges, whereas RFD (intraclass correlation coefficient = .74-.90, CV = 11.5%-18.1%) often exhibited inflated error.
The supine (90°) position was the most consistent position across both measures. Load-cell technology can be confidently used to assess shoulder rotation Fmax in 3 different positions, whereas RFD should be used with caution without protocol refinement.
便携式称重传感器技术的进步使得对肩部内旋（IR）和外旋（ER）峰值力（Fmax）以及力发展速率（RFD）进行高质量评估成为可能。本研究的目的是使用一种新型称重传感器设备，探讨不同测试位置下IR和ER的Fmax及RFD之间的可靠性和差异。
采用受试者内重复测量设计，比较3个位置（坐姿0°、仰卧位0°和仰卧位90°）下肩部IR和ER的Fmax及RFD的组内值和可靠性。
国家级游泳运动员（n = 19；年龄 = 16.8 [1.0]岁）完成了每种条件（手臂、旋转和测试位置的组合）的3次测试，测试间隔为7至14天。
在所有测试位置，IR均超过ER。除IR的RFD外（r = 0.56 - 0.73，P < 0.05），IR和ER在这些位置之间Fmax和RFD的相关性通常都很强（r > 0.85，P < 0.001）。对于第2至3次测试，Fmax的组内相关系数和变异系数（组内相关系数 = 0.89 - 0.96，变异系数 = 5.2% - 8.8%）通常在可接受范围内，而RFD（组内相关系数 = 0.74 - 0.90，变异系数 = 11.5% - 18.1%）的误差往往较大。
仰卧位（90°）在两种测量中是最一致的位置。称重传感器技术可可靠地用于评估3种不同位置下肩部旋转的Fmax，而在未完善方案的情况下，RFD的使用应谨慎。
