Literature DB >> 32255757

Comparison of linear, hyperbolic and double-hyperbolic models to assess the force-velocity relationship in multi-joint exercises.

Julian Alcazar1,2, Fernando Pareja-Blanco3, Carlos Rodriguez-Lopez1,2, Roberto Navarro-Cruz1,2, Pedro J Cornejo-Daza3, Ignacio Ara1,2, Luis M Alegre1,2.   

Abstract

AbstractThis study assessed the validity of linear, hyperbolic and double-hyperbolic models to fit measured force-velocity (F-V) data in multi-joint exercises and the influence of muscle excitation on the F-V relationship. The force-joint angle and F-V relationships were assessed in 10 cross-training athletes and 14 recreationally resistance-trained subjects in the unilateral leg press (LP) and bilateral bench press (BP) exercises, respectively. A force plate and a linear encoder were installed to register external force and velocity, respectively. Muscle excitation was assessed by surface EMG recording of the quadriceps femoris, biceps femoris and gluteus maximus muscles during the unilateral LP. Linear, Hill's (hyperbolic) and Edman's (double-hyperbolic) equations were fitted to the measured F-V data and compared. Measured F-V data were best fitted by double-hyperbolic models in both exercises (p < 0.05). F-V data deviated from the rectangular hyperbola above a breakpoint located at 90% of measured isometric force (F0) and from the linearity at ≤45% of F0 (both p < 0.05). Hyperbolic equations overestimated F0 values by 13 ± 11% and 6 ± 6% in the LP and BP, respectively (p < 0.05). No differences were found between muscle excitation levels below and above the breakpoint (p > 0.05). Large associations between variables obtained from linear and double-hyperbolic models were noted for F0, maximum muscle power, and velocity between 25% and 100% of F0 (r = 0.70-0.99; all p < 0.05). The F-V relationship in multi-joint exercises was double-hyperbolic, which was unrelated with lower muscle excitation levels. However, linear models may be valid to assess F0, maximal muscle power and velocity between 25% and 100% of F0.

Keywords:  Torque-velocity; biphasic force–velocity; maximal unloaded velocity; muscle mechanics; muscle power; velocity-based training‌

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32255757     DOI: 10.1080/17461391.2020.1753816

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Sport Sci        ISSN: 1536-7290            Impact factor:   4.050


  4 in total

1.  A novel equation that incorporates the linear and hyperbolic nature of the force-velocity relationship in lower and upper limb exercises.

Authors:  Julian Alcazar; Fernando Pareja-Blanco; Carlos Rodriguez-Lopez; Hector Gutierrez-Reguero; Juan Sanchez-Valdepeñas; Pedro J Cornejo-Daza; Ignacio Ara; Luis M Alegre
Journal:  Eur J Appl Physiol       Date:  2022-07-21       Impact factor: 3.346

2.  Force-velocity profiling in athletes: Reliability and agreement across methods.

Authors:  Kolbjørn Lindberg; Paul Solberg; Thomas Bjørnsen; Christian Helland; Bent Rønnestad; Martin Thorsen Frank; Thomas Haugen; Sindre Østerås; Morten Kristoffersen; Magnus Midttun; Fredrik Sæland; Gøran Paulsen
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-02-01       Impact factor: 3.240

3.  Effectiveness of individualized training based on force-velocity profiling on physical function in older men.

Authors:  Kolbjørn Lindberg; Hilde Lohne-Seiler; Sindre H Fosstveit; Erlend E Sibayan; Joachim S Fjeller; Sondre Løvold; Tommy Kolnes; Fredrik T Vårvik; Sveinung Berntsen; Gøran Paulsen; Olivier Seynnes; Thomas Bjørnsen
Journal:  Scand J Med Sci Sports       Date:  2022-03-22       Impact factor: 4.645

Review 4.  Toward a New Paradigm in Resistance Training by Means of Velocity Monitoring: A Critical and Challenging Narrative.

Authors:  Juan José González-Badillo; Luis Sánchez-Medina; Juan Ribas-Serna; David Rodríguez-Rosell
Journal:  Sports Med Open       Date:  2022-09-16
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.