Literature DB >> 7676101

Strength and power assessment. Issues, controversies and challenges.

P Abernethy1, G Wilson, P Logan.   

Abstract

Athletic strength and power refer to the forces or torques generated during sporting activity. Their assessment can be used for strength diagnosis or talent identification, to monitor the effects of training interventions and to estimate the relative significance of strength and power to particular athletic pursuits. However, strength and power assessment is a difficult task. Reasons for this include: the fledgling status of research within the area, our limited understanding of the mechanisms underpinning strength and power performance and development, and limitations associated with various forms of dynamometry. This article describes a frame work for the collection of data which may ultimately lead to recommendations for the assessment of strength and power in sporting contexts. Such a framework will be evolutionary and depends upon synergistic improvements in our understanding of: the physiological mechanisms underpinning strength and power development; the effect that various training regimens have upon the development of strength and power; and factors influencing the validity and reliability of dynamometry. Currently, isometric, isoinertial and isokinetic dynamometry are employed in assessment. Each form has its supporters and detractors. Basically, proponents and critics of isokinetic and isometric dynamometry emphasis their apparently high internal and apparently low external [corrected] validity respectively. While the converse applies for isoinertial dynamometry. It appears that all 3 modalities can have acceptable reliability, however this should be established rather than assumed, as the reliability of each can be threatened by a number of considerations (e.g. instruction for isometric tasks, the impact of weight used during weighted jumping tasks, and the effects of gravity and feedback on isokinetic performance). While reliability is a seminal issue in assessment, it is not the only critical issue. Specifically, there has been little research into the correlation between strength and power measures and athletic performance. This work is central to the use of such indices in talent identification. To date, this work has generally been limited to heterogeneous rather than homogeneous groups. More work is required in this area. Furthermore, not all modes of assessment are sensitive or similarly sensitive to various training interventions. This suggests that these modalities are measuring different neuromuscular qualities. How these qualities relate to performance requires more work, and will determine the contexts in which various strength and power assessment modalities and protocols are used.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

Mesh:

Year:  1995        PMID: 7676101     DOI: 10.2165/00007256-199519060-00004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Sports Med        ISSN: 0112-1642            Impact factor:   11.136


  80 in total

1.  Test-retest reliability of reciprocal isokinetic knee extension and flexion peak torque measurements.

Authors:  R W McCleary; J C Andersen
Journal:  J Athl Train       Date:  1992       Impact factor: 2.860

2.  Effects of velocity of isokinetic training on strength, power, and quadriceps muscle fibre characteristics.

Authors:  J L Ewing; D R Wolfe; M A Rogers; M L Amundson; G A Stull
Journal:  Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol       Date:  1990

3.  Effect of Visual Feedback on Maximal and Submaximal lsokinetic Test Measurements of Normal Quadricem - and Hamstrings.

Authors:  R D Hald; E J Bottjen
Journal:  J Orthop Sports Phys Ther       Date:  1987       Impact factor: 4.751

4.  Reliability of a reciprocal test protocol performed on the kinetic communicator: an isokinetic test of knee extensor and flexor strength.

Authors:  B Harding; T Black; A Bruulsema; B Maxwell; P W Stratford
Journal:  J Orthop Sports Phys Ther       Date:  1988       Impact factor: 4.751

5.  The role of learning and coordination in strength training.

Authors:  O M Rutherford; D A Jones
Journal:  Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol       Date:  1986

6.  A new dynamometer measuring concentric and eccentric muscle strength in accelerated, decelerated, or isokinetic movements. Validity and reproducibility.

Authors:  J Y Seger; S H Westing; M Hanson; E Karlson; B Ekblom
Journal:  Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol       Date:  1988

7.  Interference of strength development by simultaneously training for strength and endurance.

Authors:  R C Hickson
Journal:  Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol       Date:  1980

8.  Effects of external loading on short term power output in children and young male adults.

Authors:  C T Davies; K Young
Journal:  Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol       Date:  1984

9.  Effects of three resistance training programs on muscular strength and absolute and relative endurance.

Authors:  T Anderson; J T Kearney
Journal:  Res Q Exerc Sport       Date:  1982-03       Impact factor: 2.500

10.  Incompatibility of endurance- and strength-training modes of exercise.

Authors:  G A Dudley; R Djamil
Journal:  J Appl Physiol (1985)       Date:  1985-11
View more
  48 in total

Review 1.  'Psyching-up' and muscular force production.

Authors:  David Tod; Fiona Iredale; Nicholas Gill
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 11.136

2.  Muscle strength testing: evaluation of tests of explosive force production.

Authors:  Dragan M Mirkov; Aleksandar Nedeljkovic; Sladjan Milanovic; Slobodan Jaric
Journal:  Eur J Appl Physiol       Date:  2003-10-02       Impact factor: 3.078

Review 3.  Muscle strength testing: use of normalisation for body size.

Authors:  Slobodan Jaric
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 11.136

4.  Movement performance and body size: the relationship for different groups of tests.

Authors:  Goran Markovic; Slobodan Jaric
Journal:  Eur J Appl Physiol       Date:  2004-03-16       Impact factor: 3.078

Review 5.  A biomechanical evaluation of resistance: fundamental concepts for training and sports performance.

Authors:  David M Frost; John Cronin; Robert U Newton
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2010-04-01       Impact factor: 11.136

Review 6.  A Systematic Review of the Effect of Cognitive Strategies on Strength Performance.

Authors:  David Tod; Christian Edwards; Mike McGuigan; Geoff Lovell
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2015-11       Impact factor: 11.136

Review 7.  Professional practice in exercise science : the need for greater disciplinary balance.

Authors:  Jeffrey C Ives; Duane Knudson
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 11.136

8.  Blood pressure response to force-velocity properties of the knee-hip extension movement.

Authors:  Junichiro Yamauchi; Satoshi Nakayama; Naokata Ishii
Journal:  Eur J Appl Physiol       Date:  2007-12-04       Impact factor: 3.078

9.  Muscle strength and golf performance: a critical review.

Authors:  Lorena Torres-Ronda; Luis Sánchez-Medina; Juan J González-Badillo
Journal:  J Sports Sci Med       Date:  2011-03-01       Impact factor: 2.988

10.  Jump kinetic determinants of sprint acceleration performance from starting blocks in male sprinters.

Authors:  Peter S Maulder; Elizabeth J Bradshaw; Justin Keogh
Journal:  J Sports Sci Med       Date:  2006-06-01       Impact factor: 2.988

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.