Michelle Scott, Nathan Elsworthy, Victoria Brackley, Marc Elipot, Crystal O Kean
{"title":"自动视频系统与系留系统测量瞬时游泳速度的一致性。","authors":"Michelle Scott, Nathan Elsworthy, Victoria Brackley, Marc Elipot, Crystal O Kean","doi":"10.1080/14763141.2024.2388572","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Successful performance in competitive swimming requires a swimmer to maximise propulsion and minimise drag, which can be assessed using instantaneous swimming velocity. Many systems exist to quantify velocity, and therefore, it is important to understand the agreement between systems. This study examined the agreement between an automated video-based system and a tethered system to measure instantaneous velocity. Twenty-two competitive swimmers (state level or higher) completed 25 m of each stroke at maximal intensity. The tethered speedometer was attached to the swimmer's waist, while videos of each trial were recorded. The swimmer's head was then automatically tracked using proprietary software, and instantaneous velocity was determined from each system. Bland-Altman plots showed good agreement between the two systems in backstroke (95% Limits of Agreement (LOA): -0.24-0.26 m.s<sup>-1</sup>) and freestyle (95% LOA: -0.36-0.38 m.s<sup>-1</sup>) but poorer agreement in butterfly (95% LOA: -0.51-0.53 m.s<sup>-1</sup>) and breaststroke (95% LOA: -0.88-0.92 m.s<sup>-1</sup>). The root mean square error was higher in butterfly (0.27 m.s<sup>-1</sup>) and breaststroke (0.46 m.s<sup>-1</sup>) compared to backstroke (0.13 m.s<sup>-1</sup>) and freestyle (0.19 m.s<sup>-1</sup>). Results demonstrated that the two systems are comparable for measuring instantaneous swimming velocity; however, larger discrepancies are evident for butterfly and breaststroke.</p>","PeriodicalId":49482,"journal":{"name":"Sports Biomechanics","volume":" ","pages":"1-13"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Agreement between an automated video-based system and tethered system to measure instantaneous swimming velocity.\",\"authors\":\"Michelle Scott, Nathan Elsworthy, Victoria Brackley, Marc Elipot, Crystal O Kean\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/14763141.2024.2388572\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Successful performance in competitive swimming requires a swimmer to maximise propulsion and minimise drag, which can be assessed using instantaneous swimming velocity. Many systems exist to quantify velocity, and therefore, it is important to understand the agreement between systems. This study examined the agreement between an automated video-based system and a tethered system to measure instantaneous velocity. Twenty-two competitive swimmers (state level or higher) completed 25 m of each stroke at maximal intensity. The tethered speedometer was attached to the swimmer's waist, while videos of each trial were recorded. The swimmer's head was then automatically tracked using proprietary software, and instantaneous velocity was determined from each system. Bland-Altman plots showed good agreement between the two systems in backstroke (95% Limits of Agreement (LOA): -0.24-0.26 m.s<sup>-1</sup>) and freestyle (95% LOA: -0.36-0.38 m.s<sup>-1</sup>) but poorer agreement in butterfly (95% LOA: -0.51-0.53 m.s<sup>-1</sup>) and breaststroke (95% LOA: -0.88-0.92 m.s<sup>-1</sup>). The root mean square error was higher in butterfly (0.27 m.s<sup>-1</sup>) and breaststroke (0.46 m.s<sup>-1</sup>) compared to backstroke (0.13 m.s<sup>-1</sup>) and freestyle (0.19 m.s<sup>-1</sup>). Results demonstrated that the two systems are comparable for measuring instantaneous swimming velocity; however, larger discrepancies are evident for butterfly and breaststroke.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49482,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Sports Biomechanics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-13\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Sports Biomechanics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/14763141.2024.2388572\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sports Biomechanics","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14763141.2024.2388572","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
Agreement between an automated video-based system and tethered system to measure instantaneous swimming velocity.
Successful performance in competitive swimming requires a swimmer to maximise propulsion and minimise drag, which can be assessed using instantaneous swimming velocity. Many systems exist to quantify velocity, and therefore, it is important to understand the agreement between systems. This study examined the agreement between an automated video-based system and a tethered system to measure instantaneous velocity. Twenty-two competitive swimmers (state level or higher) completed 25 m of each stroke at maximal intensity. The tethered speedometer was attached to the swimmer's waist, while videos of each trial were recorded. The swimmer's head was then automatically tracked using proprietary software, and instantaneous velocity was determined from each system. Bland-Altman plots showed good agreement between the two systems in backstroke (95% Limits of Agreement (LOA): -0.24-0.26 m.s-1) and freestyle (95% LOA: -0.36-0.38 m.s-1) but poorer agreement in butterfly (95% LOA: -0.51-0.53 m.s-1) and breaststroke (95% LOA: -0.88-0.92 m.s-1). The root mean square error was higher in butterfly (0.27 m.s-1) and breaststroke (0.46 m.s-1) compared to backstroke (0.13 m.s-1) and freestyle (0.19 m.s-1). Results demonstrated that the two systems are comparable for measuring instantaneous swimming velocity; however, larger discrepancies are evident for butterfly and breaststroke.
期刊介绍:
Sports Biomechanics is the Thomson Reuters listed scientific journal of the International Society of Biomechanics in Sports (ISBS). The journal sets out to generate knowledge to improve human performance and reduce the incidence of injury, and to communicate this knowledge to scientists, coaches, clinicians, teachers, and participants. The target performance realms include not only the conventional areas of sports and exercise, but also fundamental motor skills and other highly specialized human movements such as dance (both sport and artistic).
Sports Biomechanics is unique in its emphasis on a broad biomechanical spectrum of human performance including, but not limited to, technique, skill acquisition, training, strength and conditioning, exercise, coaching, teaching, equipment, modeling and simulation, measurement, and injury prevention and rehabilitation. As well as maintaining scientific rigour, there is a strong editorial emphasis on ''reader friendliness''. By emphasising the practical implications and applications of research, the journal seeks to benefit practitioners directly.
Sports Biomechanics publishes papers in four sections: Original Research, Reviews, Teaching, and Methods and Theoretical Perspectives.