Cargando…

Is Test Standardization Important when Arm and Leg Muscle Mechanical Properties are Assessed through the Force‐Velocity Relationship?

The force‐velocity (F‐V) relationship observed in multi‐joint tasks proved to be strong and approximately linear. Recent studies showed that mechanical properties of muscles: force (F), velocity (V) and power (P) could be assessed through the F‐V relationship although the testing methods have not be...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Cosic, Marko, Djuric, Sasa, Zivkovic, Milena Z., Nedeljkovic, Aleksandar, Leontijevic, Bojan, Jaric, Slobodan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Sciendo 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6815085/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31666888
http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/hukin-2019-0010
_version_ 1783463129785565184
author Cosic, Marko
Djuric, Sasa
Zivkovic, Milena Z.
Nedeljkovic, Aleksandar
Leontijevic, Bojan
Jaric, Slobodan
author_facet Cosic, Marko
Djuric, Sasa
Zivkovic, Milena Z.
Nedeljkovic, Aleksandar
Leontijevic, Bojan
Jaric, Slobodan
author_sort Cosic, Marko
collection PubMed
description The force‐velocity (F‐V) relationship observed in multi‐joint tasks proved to be strong and approximately linear. Recent studies showed that mechanical properties of muscles: force (F), velocity (V) and power (P) could be assessed through the F‐V relationship although the testing methods have not been standardized. The aim of the present study was to evaluate and compare F‐V relationships assessed from two tests performed on a modified Smith machine that standardizes kinematics of the movement pattern. Fifteen participants were tested on the maximum performance bench press throws and squat jumps performed against a variety of different loads. In addition, their strength properties were assessed through maximum isometric force (Fiso) and one repetition maximum (1 RM). The observed individual F‐V relationships were exceptionally strong and approximately linear (r = 0.98 for bench press throws; r = 0.99 for squat jumps). F‐V relationship parameter depicting maximum force (F0) revealed high correlations with both Fiso and 1 RM indicating high concurrent validity (p < 0.01). However, the generalizability of F‐V relationship parameters depicting maximum force (F0), velocity (V0) and power (P0) of the tested muscle groups was inconsistent and on average low (i.e. F0; r = ‐0.24) to moderate (i.e. V0 and P0; r = 0.54 and r = 0.64, respectively; both p < 0.05). We concluded that the F‐V relationship could be used for the assessment of arm and leg muscle mechanical properties when standard tests are applied, since the typical outcome is an exceptionally strong and linear F‐V relationship, as well as high concurrent validity of its parameters. However, muscle mechanical properties could be only partially generalized across different tests and muscles.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6815085
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Sciendo
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-68150852019-10-30 Is Test Standardization Important when Arm and Leg Muscle Mechanical Properties are Assessed through the Force‐Velocity Relationship? Cosic, Marko Djuric, Sasa Zivkovic, Milena Z. Nedeljkovic, Aleksandar Leontijevic, Bojan Jaric, Slobodan J Hum Kinet Section I - Kinesiology The force‐velocity (F‐V) relationship observed in multi‐joint tasks proved to be strong and approximately linear. Recent studies showed that mechanical properties of muscles: force (F), velocity (V) and power (P) could be assessed through the F‐V relationship although the testing methods have not been standardized. The aim of the present study was to evaluate and compare F‐V relationships assessed from two tests performed on a modified Smith machine that standardizes kinematics of the movement pattern. Fifteen participants were tested on the maximum performance bench press throws and squat jumps performed against a variety of different loads. In addition, their strength properties were assessed through maximum isometric force (Fiso) and one repetition maximum (1 RM). The observed individual F‐V relationships were exceptionally strong and approximately linear (r = 0.98 for bench press throws; r = 0.99 for squat jumps). F‐V relationship parameter depicting maximum force (F0) revealed high correlations with both Fiso and 1 RM indicating high concurrent validity (p < 0.01). However, the generalizability of F‐V relationship parameters depicting maximum force (F0), velocity (V0) and power (P0) of the tested muscle groups was inconsistent and on average low (i.e. F0; r = ‐0.24) to moderate (i.e. V0 and P0; r = 0.54 and r = 0.64, respectively; both p < 0.05). We concluded that the F‐V relationship could be used for the assessment of arm and leg muscle mechanical properties when standard tests are applied, since the typical outcome is an exceptionally strong and linear F‐V relationship, as well as high concurrent validity of its parameters. However, muscle mechanical properties could be only partially generalized across different tests and muscles. Sciendo 2019-10-18 /pmc/articles/PMC6815085/ /pubmed/31666888 http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/hukin-2019-0010 Text en © 2019 Marko Cosic, Sasa Djuric, Milena Z. Zivkovic, Aleksandar Nedeljkovic, Bojan Leontijevic, Slobodan Jaric, published by Sciendo http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0 This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.
spellingShingle Section I - Kinesiology
Cosic, Marko
Djuric, Sasa
Zivkovic, Milena Z.
Nedeljkovic, Aleksandar
Leontijevic, Bojan
Jaric, Slobodan
Is Test Standardization Important when Arm and Leg Muscle Mechanical Properties are Assessed through the Force‐Velocity Relationship?
title Is Test Standardization Important when Arm and Leg Muscle Mechanical Properties are Assessed through the Force‐Velocity Relationship?
title_full Is Test Standardization Important when Arm and Leg Muscle Mechanical Properties are Assessed through the Force‐Velocity Relationship?
title_fullStr Is Test Standardization Important when Arm and Leg Muscle Mechanical Properties are Assessed through the Force‐Velocity Relationship?
title_full_unstemmed Is Test Standardization Important when Arm and Leg Muscle Mechanical Properties are Assessed through the Force‐Velocity Relationship?
title_short Is Test Standardization Important when Arm and Leg Muscle Mechanical Properties are Assessed through the Force‐Velocity Relationship?
title_sort is test standardization important when arm and leg muscle mechanical properties are assessed through the force‐velocity relationship?
topic Section I - Kinesiology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6815085/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31666888
http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/hukin-2019-0010
work_keys_str_mv AT cosicmarko isteststandardizationimportantwhenarmandlegmusclemechanicalpropertiesareassessedthroughtheforcevelocityrelationship
AT djuricsasa isteststandardizationimportantwhenarmandlegmusclemechanicalpropertiesareassessedthroughtheforcevelocityrelationship
AT zivkovicmilenaz isteststandardizationimportantwhenarmandlegmusclemechanicalpropertiesareassessedthroughtheforcevelocityrelationship
AT nedeljkovicaleksandar isteststandardizationimportantwhenarmandlegmusclemechanicalpropertiesareassessedthroughtheforcevelocityrelationship
AT leontijevicbojan isteststandardizationimportantwhenarmandlegmusclemechanicalpropertiesareassessedthroughtheforcevelocityrelationship
AT jaricslobodan isteststandardizationimportantwhenarmandlegmusclemechanicalpropertiesareassessedthroughtheforcevelocityrelationship