| Literature DB >> 26839603 |
Abstract
The aim of this paper was to outline a multilevel modeling approach to fit individual angle-specific torque curves describing concentric knee extension and flexion isokinetic muscular actions in Master athletes. The potential of the analytical approach to examine between individual differences across the angle-specific torque curves was illustrated including between-individuals variation due to gender differences at a higher level. Torques in concentric muscular actions of knee extension and knee extension at 60º·s(-1) were considered within a range of motion between 5º and 85º (only torques "truly" isokinetic). Multilevel time series models with autoregressive covariance structures with standard multilevel models were superior fits compared with standard multilevel models for repeated measures to fit angle-specific torque curves. Third and fourth order polynomial models were the best fits to describe angle-specific torque curves of isokinetic knee flexion and extension concentric actions, respectively. The fixed exponents allow interpretations for initial acceleration, the angle at peak torque and the decrement of torque after peak torque. Also, the multilevel models were flexible to illustrate the influence of gender differences on the shape of torque throughout the range of motion and in the shape of the curves. The presented multilevel regression models may afford a general framework to examine angle-specific moment curves by isokinetic dynamometry, and add to the understanding mechanisms of strength development, particularly the force-length relationship, both related to performance and injury prevention.Entities:
Keywords: isokinetic; multilevel regression modeling; muscle function; strength
Year: 2015 PMID: 26839603 PMCID: PMC4723175 DOI: 10.1515/hukin-2015-0105
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Hum Kinet ISSN: 1640-5544 Impact factor: 2.193
Figure 1Examining the OLS individual trajectories of isokinetic knee extension (Panel A) and flexion (Panel B) muscular actions at 60º·s−1 in master athletes. Note that in Panel A 0º corresponds to knee flexion at 90º as the angle scale was inverted in the models for knee extension curves.
Comparison between nonlinear fits using multilevel modeling with autoregressive covariance structures to describe angle-specific moment curves of concentric knee extension and flexion isokinetic muscular actions in Master athletes
| Degrees of freedom | Akaike’s Information Criterion | Bayesian Information Criterion | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Knee extension | |||
| 11 | 4130.148 | 4183.843 | |
| 12 | 4103.988 | 4162.565 | |
| 13 | 4105.865 | 4169.323 | |
|
| |||
| Knee flexion | |||
| 11 | 3549.111 | 3602.795 | |
| 12 | 3519.852 | 3578.416 | |
| 13 | 3426.012 | 3489.457 | |
θ represents the angular position
Figure 2Angle-specific torque curves fitted using multilevel modeling in concentric knee extension and knee flexion isokinetic muscular actions at 60º·s−1 in Master athletes (Panel A: predicted concentric knee extension angle-specific torque curves using second order polynomial and third order polynomial fits, note that 0º in Panel A corresponds to knee flexion at 90º as the angle scale was inverted in the models for knee extension curves; Panel B: predicted concentric knee flexion angle-specific torque curves using second order polynomial and fourth order polynomial fits).
Comparison between nonlinear fits using multilevel modeling to describe angle-specific moment curves of concentric knee extension and flexion isokinetic muscular actions in Master athletes
| Concentric knee extension | ||
|---|---|---|
|
| ||
| Parameter | Second order polynomials model | Third order polynomials model |
| Intercept | 35.22 (19.62 to 54.86) | 30.91 (11.21 to 50.62) |
| 4.03 (3.78 to 4.31) | 5.06 (4.61 to 5.51) | |
| −0.03 (−0.05 to −0.04) | −0.08 (−0.09 to −0.07) | |
| - | 0.0002 (0.0001 to 0.0003) | |
| - | - | |
|
| ||
| Concentric knee flexion | ||
|
| ||
| Second order polynomials model | Fourth order polynomials model | |
|
| ||
| Intercept | 13.63 (3.57 to 23.70) | 8.85 (−1.27 to 19.00) |
| 2.33 (2.13 to 2.52 | 3.70 (3.16 to 4.27) | |
| −0.026 (−0.028 to −0.024) | −0.12 (−0.14 to −0.09) | |
| - | 0.002 (0.001 to 0.002) | |
| - | −0.000011 (−0.000013 to −0.000009) | |
θ represents the angular position
Figure 3Angle-specific torque curves fitted by gender using multilevel modeling in concentric knee extension and knee flexion isokinetic muscular actions at 60º·s−1 in Master athletes (Panel A: predicted concentric knee extension angle- specific torque curve, note that 0º in Panel A corresponds to knee flexion at 90º as the angle scale was inverted in the models for knee extension curves; Panel B: predicted concentric knee flexion angle-specific torque curve).