Measuring what matters in isometric multi-joint rate of force development.

This study aimed to evaluate responsiveness (ability to detect change) of isometric force-time measures to neuromuscular fatigue in resistance-trained participants using two differing protocols that modified both the instructions provided to participants and the duration of the test. Both protocols were completed at two knee joint angles in the isometric squat test. Ten participants volunteered to take part in this study (age: 27.0 ± 4.5 years, strength training experience: 7.7 ± 2.6 years). Isometric peak force (ISqTpeak) and isometric explosive force (ISqTexp) test protocols were assessed at two joint angles (knee angle 100° and 125°) pre-high intensity strength training, immediately post strength training, 24-h post, 48-h post and analysed for peak and RFD performance. Participants completed eight sets of three repetitions of the back-squat exercise as the high-intensity strength training. Results showed the highest standardised response means (SRM) detected was peak force using the ISqTpeak 100, SRM -1.97 compared to an SRM of -1.31 for RFD 200 ms in the ISqTexp 125. Peak force was the most responsive variable using the ISqTpeak protocol, whereas the ISqTexp protocol was most responsive for RFD measures. Therefore, ISqTpeak and ISqTexp test protocols should not be used interchangeably to evaluate RFD variables.