Using the Isometric Mid-Thigh Pull to Predict Three-Repetition Maximum Squat Values in Female Athletes

Abstract

Prescribing correct training loads in strength- and power-based sports is essential to eliciting performance improvements for athletes. Concurrently, testing strength for the prescription of training loads should be accurate and safe with minimal disruption or fatigue inducement to the athlete. The purpose of this study was to develop a prediction equation in female athletes for the three-repetition maximum (3RM) squat using the isometric mid-thigh pull and basic anthropometric assessments that could be practically applied to support training prescriptions. Female athletes (n = 34) were recruited from netball, volleyball, basketball, and soccer across a spectrum of competitive standards. Each athlete’s weight, standing height, seated height, arm span, and biacromial breadth were recorded, and then, on separate occasions separated by at least 48 h, each athlete completed a 3RM squat test and an isometric mid-thigh pull (IMTP) assessment. IMTP variables of peak force and time-dependent force at 50, 100, 150, 200, and 250 ms, as well as anthropometric measures, were used to develop a prediction equation. Squat strength was low-to-moderately correlated with peak force (r = 0.386); force at 100 ms (r = −0.128), 150 ms (r = −0.040), and 200 ms (r = −0.034); standing height (r = 0.294); and biacromial breadth (r = −0.410). Stepwise multiple regression significantly (p < 0.05) explained 26% of the 3RM squat strength variation using peak force and force at 100 ms, resulting in the following equation: Predicted 3RM squat (kg) = [6.102 + (Peak Force × 0.002) − (Force@100 ms × 0.001)]2. The reported equation’s predictive accuracy was tested using the same testing protocols following 6–8 weeks of training in a sub-cohort of athletes (n = 14). The predicted and actual recorded 3RM values were not significantly (p = 0.313) different, supporting the use of the IMTP as a test that contributes informative values for use in a predictive equation for training prescription and thus reducing the testing and fatigue-inducing impost on female athletes. However, the 95% CI (−4.18–12.09) indicated predicted values could differ in excess of 10 kg. This difference could lead to an excessive load prescription for an athlete’s training program, indicating caution should be taken if using the described method to predict 3RM squat values for programming purposes.