Ralf Roth1, Lars Donath2, Eduard Kurz3, Lukas Zahner4, Oliver Faude5. 1. Department of Sport, Exercise and Health, University of Basel, Birsstrasse 320B, 4052, Basel, Switzerland. Electronic address: ralf.roth@unibas.ch. 2. Department of Sport, Exercise and Health, University of Basel, Birsstrasse 320B, 4052, Basel, Switzerland. Electronic address: lars.donath@unibas.ch. 3. Department of Sport, Exercise and Health, University of Basel, Birsstrasse 320B, 4052, Basel, Switzerland; Clinic for Trauma, Hand and Reconstructive Surgery, Division of Motor Research, Pathophysiology and Biomechanics, Jena University Hospital, Bachstrasse 18, 07743, Jena, Germany. Electronic address: eduard.kurz@med.uni-jena.de. 4. Department of Sport, Exercise and Health, University of Basel, Birsstrasse 320B, 4052, Basel, Switzerland. Electronic address: lukas.zahner@unibas.ch. 5. Department of Sport, Exercise and Health, University of Basel, Birsstrasse 320B, 4052, Basel, Switzerland. Electronic address: oliver.faude@unibas.ch.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The present study aimed to assess the between day reliability of isokinetic and isometric peak torque (PT) during trunk measurement on an isokinetic device (IsoMed 2000). DESIGN: Test-retest-protocol on five separate days. PARTICIPANTS: Fifteen healthy sport students (8 female and 7 male) aged 21 to 26. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: PT was assessed in isometric back extension and flexion as well as right and left rotation. Isokinetic strength was captured at a speed of 60°/s and 150°/s for all tasks. RESULTS: For none of the assessed parameters a meaningful variation in PT during test days was observed. Relative reliability (ICC = 0.85-0.96) was excellent for all tasks. Estimates of absolute reliability as Coefficient of Variation (CoV) and Standard Error of Measurement (SEM in Nm/kg lean body mass) remained stable for isometric (6.9% < CoV < 9.4%; 0.15 < SEM < 0.23) and isokinetic mode (60°/s: 3.7% < CoV < 8.6%; 0.08 < SEM < 0.24; 150°/s: 6.9% < CoV < 12.4%; 0.10 < SEM < 0.31). In contrast, reliability between familiarization day and day 1 was lower (6.6% < CoV < 26.2%; 0.10 < SEM < 0.65). CONCLUSIONS: Trunk strength measurement in flexion and extension or trunk rotation in either isometric or isokinetic condition is highly reliable. Therefore, it seems possible to elucidate changes which are smaller than 10% due to intervention programs when a preceding familiarization condition was applied.
OBJECTIVES: The present study aimed to assess the between day reliability of isokinetic and isometric peak torque (PT) during trunk measurement on an isokinetic device (IsoMed 2000). DESIGN: Test-retest-protocol on five separate days. PARTICIPANTS: Fifteen healthy sport students (8 female and 7 male) aged 21 to 26. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: PT was assessed in isometric back extension and flexion as well as right and left rotation. Isokinetic strength was captured at a speed of 60°/s and 150°/s for all tasks. RESULTS: For none of the assessed parameters a meaningful variation in PT during test days was observed. Relative reliability (ICC = 0.85-0.96) was excellent for all tasks. Estimates of absolute reliability as Coefficient of Variation (CoV) and Standard Error of Measurement (SEM in Nm/kg lean body mass) remained stable for isometric (6.9% < CoV < 9.4%; 0.15 < SEM < 0.23) and isokinetic mode (60°/s: 3.7% < CoV < 8.6%; 0.08 < SEM < 0.24; 150°/s: 6.9% < CoV < 12.4%; 0.10 < SEM < 0.31). In contrast, reliability between familiarization day and day 1 was lower (6.6% < CoV < 26.2%; 0.10 < SEM < 0.65). CONCLUSIONS: Trunk strength measurement in flexion and extension or trunk rotation in either isometric or isokinetic condition is highly reliable. Therefore, it seems possible to elucidate changes which are smaller than 10% due to intervention programs when a preceding familiarization condition was applied.
Authors: Sarah Schlaeger; Stephanie Inhuber; Alexander Rohrmeier; Michael Dieckmeyer; Friedemann Freitag; Elisabeth Klupp; Dominik Weidlich; Georg Feuerriegel; Florian Kreuzpointner; Ansgar Schwirtz; Ernst J Rummeny; Claus Zimmer; Jan S Kirschke; Dimitrios C Karampinos; Thomas Baum Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2018-07-16 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Elisabeth Klupp; Barbara Cervantes; Sarah Schlaeger; Stephanie Inhuber; Florian Kreuzpointer; Ansgar Schwirtz; Alexander Rohrmeier; Michael Dieckmeyer; Dennis M Hedderich; Maximilian N Diefenbach; Friedemann Freitag; Ernst J Rummeny; Claus Zimmer; Jan S Kirschke; Dimitrios C Karampinos; Thomas Baum Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2019-02-05 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Marceli M A Mesquita; Marta S Santos; Alan B S Vasconcelos; Clodoaldo A de Sá; Luana C D Pereira; Ínea B M da Silva-Santos; Walderi M da Silva Junior; Dihogo G de Matos; Alan Dos S Fontes; Paulo M P Oliveira; Felipe J Aidar; Josimari M DeSantana; Iohanna G S Fernandes; Marzo E Da Silva-Grigoletto Journal: J Aging Res Date: 2019-07-01
Authors: Sen Yang; Wenjie Wu; Chengmin Zhang; Donggui Wang; Can Chen; Yong Tang; Kai Li; Jianzhong Xu; Fei Luo Journal: J Int Med Res Date: 2019-11-07 Impact factor: 1.671