Porter M M, Vandervoort A A, Kramer J F
Faculty of Kinesiology, University of Western Ontario, London, Canada.
Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1996 Apr;28(4):516-22. doi: 10.1097/00005768-199604000-00018.
Different methods have been used for concentric (CONC) isokinetic testing of ankle dorsiflexion (DF) and plantar flexion (PF). However, little information is available on either the reliability of these protocols or eccentric (ECC) torque production. As well, previous studies utilized non-weight-bearing test positions. The purpose of this study was to develop a reliable method of testing CONC and ECC DF and PF in a weight-bearing position. One group of adults, including older men and women were tested on two occasions with a standing protocol. Another group of older and younger men and women were compared between the standing method and a supine protocol. For both positions the velocity was 30 degrees.s-1 for the CONC and ECC actions, and the range of motion was 10 degrees DF to 20 degrees PF. Reliability coefficients for peak torque (PT) were acceptable and ranged from 0.65 to 0.90. The two testing positions were significantly related (r = 0.84-0.91), but CONC PT in standing were greater than supine. Therefore, this method of testing isokinetic DF and PF in a standing position has acceptable reliability and produces results consistent with those acquired with the supine protocol. It provides a means of comparing groups and examining intervention strategies while weight-bearing.
不同的方法已被用于踝关节背屈（DF）和跖屈（PF）的等速向心（CONC）测试。然而，关于这些方案的可靠性或离心（ECC）扭矩产生的信息却很少。此外，以往的研究采用的是非负重测试体位。本研究的目的是开发一种在负重体位下测试CONC和ECC DF及PF的可靠方法。一组成年人，包括老年男性和女性，采用站立方案进行了两次测试。另一组老年和年轻男性及女性在站立方法和仰卧方案之间进行了比较。对于两种体位，CONC和ECC动作的速度均为30度·秒-1，活动范围为DF 10度至PF 20度。峰值扭矩（PT）的可靠性系数是可接受的，范围为0.65至0.90。两种测试体位显著相关（r = 0.84 - 0.91），但站立时的CONC PT大于仰卧位。因此，这种在站立位测试等速DF和PF的方法具有可接受的可靠性，并且产生的结果与仰卧方案获得的结果一致。它提供了一种在负重时比较不同组并检查干预策略的方法。
