Thomas G Palmer1, Timothy L Uhl. 1. Department of Rehabilitation Science, University of Kentucky, Lexington, USA. Palmert1@nku.edu
Abstract
CONTEXT: Assessment techniques used to measure functional tasks involving active trunk control are restricted to linear movements that lack the explosive movements and dynamic tasks associated with activities of daily living and sport. Reliable clinical methods used to assess the diagonal and ballistic movements about the trunk are lacking. OBJECTIVE: To assess the interday reliability of peak muscular power outputs while participants performed diagonal chop and lift tests and maintained a stable trunk. DESIGN: Controlled laboratory study. SETTING: University research laboratory. PATIENTS OR OTHER PARTICIPANTS: Eighteen healthy individuals (10 men and 8 women; age = 32 ± 11 years, height = 168 ± 12 cm, mass = 80 ± 19 kg) from the general population participated. INTERVENTION(S): Participants performed 2 power tests (chop, lift) using an isotonic dynamometer and 3 endurance tests (Biering-Sørensen, side-plank left, side-plank right) to assess active trunk control. Testing was performed on 3 different days separated by at least 1 week. Reliability was compared between days 1 and 2 and between days 2 and 3. Correlations between the power and endurance tests were evaluated to determine the degree of similarity. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Peak muscular power outputs (watts) derived from a 1-repetition maximum protocol for the chop and lift tests were collected for both the right and left sides. RESULTS: Intraclass correlation coefficients for peak muscular power were highly reliable for the chop (range, 0.87-0.98), lift (range, 0.83-0.96), and endurance (range, 0.80-0.98) tests between test sessions. The correlations between the power assessments and the Biering-Sørensen test (r range, -0.008 to 0.017) were low. The side-plank tests were moderately correlated with the chop (r range, 0.528-0.590) and the lift (r range, 0.359-0.467) tests. CONCLUSIONS: The diagonal chop and lift power protocol generated reliable data and appears to be a dynamic test that simulates functional tasks, which require dynamic trunk control.
CONTEXT: Assessment techniques used to measure functional tasks involving active trunk control are restricted to linear movements that lack the explosive movements and dynamic tasks associated with activities of daily living and sport. Reliable clinical methods used to assess the diagonal and ballistic movements about the trunk are lacking. OBJECTIVE: To assess the interday reliability of peak muscular power outputs while participants performed diagonal chop and lift tests and maintained a stable trunk. DESIGN: Controlled laboratory study. SETTING: University research laboratory. PATIENTS OR OTHER PARTICIPANTS: Eighteen healthy individuals (10 men and 8 women; age = 32 ± 11 years, height = 168 ± 12 cm, mass = 80 ± 19 kg) from the general population participated. INTERVENTION(S): Participants performed 2 power tests (chop, lift) using an isotonic dynamometer and 3 endurance tests (Biering-Sørensen, side-plank left, side-plank right) to assess active trunk control. Testing was performed on 3 different days separated by at least 1 week. Reliability was compared between days 1 and 2 and between days 2 and 3. Correlations between the power and endurance tests were evaluated to determine the degree of similarity. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Peak muscular power outputs (watts) derived from a 1-repetition maximum protocol for the chop and lift tests were collected for both the right and left sides. RESULTS: Intraclass correlation coefficients for peak muscular power were highly reliable for the chop (range, 0.87-0.98), lift (range, 0.83-0.96), and endurance (range, 0.80-0.98) tests between test sessions. The correlations between the power assessments and the Biering-Sørensen test (r range, -0.008 to 0.017) were low. The side-plank tests were moderately correlated with the chop (r range, 0.528-0.590) and the lift (r range, 0.359-0.467) tests. CONCLUSIONS: The diagonal chop and lift power protocol generated reliable data and appears to be a dynamic test that simulates functional tasks, which require dynamic trunk control.
Authors: Darin T Leetun; Mary Lloyd Ireland; John D Willson; Bryon T Ballantyne; Irene McClay Davis Journal: Med Sci Sports Exerc Date: 2004-06 Impact factor: 5.411
Authors: Veerle K Stevens; Katie G Bouche; Nele N Mahieu; Dirk C Cambier; Guy G Vanderstraeten; Lieven A Danneels Journal: Am J Phys Med Rehabil Date: 2006-09 Impact factor: 2.159
Authors: Thomas Palmer; Timothy L Uhl; Dana Howell; Timothy E Hewett; Kert Viele; Carl G Mattacola Journal: J Athl Train Date: 2015-04-06 Impact factor: 2.860
Authors: Ulrika Tranaeus; Nathan Weiss; Victor Lyberg; Martin Hagglund; Markus Waldén; Urban Johnson; Martin Asker; Eva Skillgate Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2022-01-12 Impact factor: 2.692