Cargando…

Reliability, Validity, and Comparison of Barbell Velocity Measurement Devices during the Jump Shrug and Hang High Pull

This study examined the reliability, potential bias, and practical differences between the GymAware Powertool (GA), Tendo Power Analyzer (TENDO), and Push Band 2.0 (PUSH) during the jump shrug (JS) and hang high pull (HHP) performed across a spectrum of loads. Fifteen resistance-trained men performe...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Suchomel, Timothy J., Techmanski, Baylee S., Kissick, Cameron R., Comfort, Paul
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10055813/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36976132
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jfmk8010035
_version_ 1785015965710286848
author Suchomel, Timothy J.
Techmanski, Baylee S.
Kissick, Cameron R.
Comfort, Paul
author_facet Suchomel, Timothy J.
Techmanski, Baylee S.
Kissick, Cameron R.
Comfort, Paul
author_sort Suchomel, Timothy J.
collection PubMed
description This study examined the reliability, potential bias, and practical differences between the GymAware Powertool (GA), Tendo Power Analyzer (TENDO), and Push Band 2.0 (PUSH) during the jump shrug (JS) and hang high pull (HHP) performed across a spectrum of loads. Fifteen resistance-trained men performed JS and HHP repetitions with 20, 40, 60, 80, and 100% of their 1RM hang power clean, and mean (MBV) and peak barbell velocity (PBV) were determined by each velocity measurement device. Least-products regression and Bland–Altman plots were used to examine instances of proportional, fixed, and systematic bias between the TENDO and PUSH compared to the GA. Hedge’s g effect sizes were also calculated to determine any meaningful differences between devices. The GA and TENDO displayed excellent reliability and acceptable variability during the JS and HHP while the PUSH showed instances of poor–moderate reliability and unacceptable variability at various loads. While the TENDO and PUSH showed instances of various bias, the TENDO device demonstrated greater validity when compared to the GA. Trivial–small differences were shown between the GA and TENDO during the JS and HHP exercises while trivial–moderate differences existed between GA and PUSH during the JS. However, despite trivial–small effects between the GA and PUSH devices at 20 and 40% 1RM during the HHP, practically meaningful differences existed at 60, 80, and 100%, indicating that the PUSH velocity outputs were not accurate. The TENDO appears to be more reliable and valid than the PUSH when measuring MBV and PBV during the JS and HHP.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10055813
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-100558132023-03-30 Reliability, Validity, and Comparison of Barbell Velocity Measurement Devices during the Jump Shrug and Hang High Pull Suchomel, Timothy J. Techmanski, Baylee S. Kissick, Cameron R. Comfort, Paul J Funct Morphol Kinesiol Article This study examined the reliability, potential bias, and practical differences between the GymAware Powertool (GA), Tendo Power Analyzer (TENDO), and Push Band 2.0 (PUSH) during the jump shrug (JS) and hang high pull (HHP) performed across a spectrum of loads. Fifteen resistance-trained men performed JS and HHP repetitions with 20, 40, 60, 80, and 100% of their 1RM hang power clean, and mean (MBV) and peak barbell velocity (PBV) were determined by each velocity measurement device. Least-products regression and Bland–Altman plots were used to examine instances of proportional, fixed, and systematic bias between the TENDO and PUSH compared to the GA. Hedge’s g effect sizes were also calculated to determine any meaningful differences between devices. The GA and TENDO displayed excellent reliability and acceptable variability during the JS and HHP while the PUSH showed instances of poor–moderate reliability and unacceptable variability at various loads. While the TENDO and PUSH showed instances of various bias, the TENDO device demonstrated greater validity when compared to the GA. Trivial–small differences were shown between the GA and TENDO during the JS and HHP exercises while trivial–moderate differences existed between GA and PUSH during the JS. However, despite trivial–small effects between the GA and PUSH devices at 20 and 40% 1RM during the HHP, practically meaningful differences existed at 60, 80, and 100%, indicating that the PUSH velocity outputs were not accurate. The TENDO appears to be more reliable and valid than the PUSH when measuring MBV and PBV during the JS and HHP. MDPI 2023-03-16 /pmc/articles/PMC10055813/ /pubmed/36976132 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jfmk8010035 Text en © 2023 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Suchomel, Timothy J.
Techmanski, Baylee S.
Kissick, Cameron R.
Comfort, Paul
Reliability, Validity, and Comparison of Barbell Velocity Measurement Devices during the Jump Shrug and Hang High Pull
title Reliability, Validity, and Comparison of Barbell Velocity Measurement Devices during the Jump Shrug and Hang High Pull
title_full Reliability, Validity, and Comparison of Barbell Velocity Measurement Devices during the Jump Shrug and Hang High Pull
title_fullStr Reliability, Validity, and Comparison of Barbell Velocity Measurement Devices during the Jump Shrug and Hang High Pull
title_full_unstemmed Reliability, Validity, and Comparison of Barbell Velocity Measurement Devices during the Jump Shrug and Hang High Pull
title_short Reliability, Validity, and Comparison of Barbell Velocity Measurement Devices during the Jump Shrug and Hang High Pull
title_sort reliability, validity, and comparison of barbell velocity measurement devices during the jump shrug and hang high pull
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10055813/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36976132
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jfmk8010035
work_keys_str_mv AT suchomeltimothyj reliabilityvalidityandcomparisonofbarbellvelocitymeasurementdevicesduringthejumpshrugandhanghighpull
AT techmanskibaylees reliabilityvalidityandcomparisonofbarbellvelocitymeasurementdevicesduringthejumpshrugandhanghighpull
AT kissickcameronr reliabilityvalidityandcomparisonofbarbellvelocitymeasurementdevicesduringthejumpshrugandhanghighpull
AT comfortpaul reliabilityvalidityandcomparisonofbarbellvelocitymeasurementdevicesduringthejumpshrugandhanghighpull