Goran Jankovic, Danica Janicijevic, Aleksandar Nedeljkovic, Milos R Petrovic, Marko Cosic, Amador Garcia-Ramos
{"title":"不同加载类型对力-速度关系参数有效性和大小的影响","authors":"Goran Jankovic, Danica Janicijevic, Aleksandar Nedeljkovic, Milos R Petrovic, Marko Cosic, Amador Garcia-Ramos","doi":"10.1177/19417381231182131","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Force-velocity (<i>F-V</i>) relationship models gained popularity as a tool for muscle mechanical assessment. However, it is not clear whether the validity of the <i>F-V</i> relationship parameters (maximal theoretical force [<i>F</i><sub>0</sub>], velocity [<i>V</i><sub>0</sub>] and power [<i>P</i><sub>max</sub>]) is affected using different load types: gravitational (<i>W</i>, rubber bands pulling the barbell downward), inertial (<i>I</i>, rubber bands pulling the barbell, which is equalized to the weight of the added plates upward), and combined (<i>W</i> + <i>I</i>, weight of the plates).</p><p><strong>Hypothesis: </strong>Load type would affect both the magnitude and validity of <i>F-V</i> relationship parameters. The highest magnitude and validity was expected for <i>F</i><sub>0</sub> using a <i>W</i>, for <i>V</i><sub>0</sub> using an <i>I</i>, and for <i>P</i><sub>max</sub> using a <i>W</i> + <i>I</i> load.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>Cross-sectional.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Level 3.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 13 resistance-trained men (body mass, 87.7 ± 11.2 kg and body height, 183.9 ± 6.4 cm) performed bench press (BP) throws (BPTs) using 3 types of loads against 30 to 80 kg. The validity of <i>F-V</i> relationship parameters was explored with respect to the tests used traditionally for force (maximal voluntary contraction and 1-repetition maximum [1RM]), velocity (maximal velocity achieved during almost unloaded tasks), and power (BPT against the 50%1RM and medicine ball throws) assessment.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The <i>W + I</i> loading promoted the highest values of <i>F</i><sub>0</sub> and <i>P</i><sub>max</sub>, while the highest magnitude of <i>V</i><sub>0</sub> was promoted by the <i>I</i> loading. The validity was acceptable for <i>F</i><sub>0</sub> obtained using the 3 loading conditions with respect to the BP 1RM (<i>r</i> range, 0.30-0.83), and <i>V</i><sub>0</sub> obtained using the <i>I</i> loading with respect to the stick throw (<i>r</i> = 0.54).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The magnitude of the <i>F-V</i> relationship parameters is affected by load type, but their validity with respect to standardized tests is comparable, with the exception of the higher validity of <i>V</i><sub>0</sub> when obtained using the <i>I</i> loading.</p><p><strong>Clinical relevance: </strong>Any load type can be used for assessing <i>F</i><sub>0</sub>, while <i>I</i> load should be selected when assessing <i>V</i><sub>0</sub>.</p>","PeriodicalId":54276,"journal":{"name":"Sports Health-A Multidisciplinary Approach","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11195856/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effects of Different Loading Types on the Validity and Magnitude of Force-Velocity Relationship Parameters.\",\"authors\":\"Goran Jankovic, Danica Janicijevic, Aleksandar Nedeljkovic, Milos R Petrovic, Marko Cosic, Amador Garcia-Ramos\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/19417381231182131\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Force-velocity (<i>F-V</i>) relationship models gained popularity as a tool for muscle mechanical assessment. However, it is not clear whether the validity of the <i>F-V</i> relationship parameters (maximal theoretical force [<i>F</i><sub>0</sub>], velocity [<i>V</i><sub>0</sub>] and power [<i>P</i><sub>max</sub>]) is affected using different load types: gravitational (<i>W</i>, rubber bands pulling the barbell downward), inertial (<i>I</i>, rubber bands pulling the barbell, which is equalized to the weight of the added plates upward), and combined (<i>W</i> + <i>I</i>, weight of the plates).</p><p><strong>Hypothesis: </strong>Load type would affect both the magnitude and validity of <i>F-V</i> relationship parameters. The highest magnitude and validity was expected for <i>F</i><sub>0</sub> using a <i>W</i>, for <i>V</i><sub>0</sub> using an <i>I</i>, and for <i>P</i><sub>max</sub> using a <i>W</i> + <i>I</i> load.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>Cross-sectional.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Level 3.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 13 resistance-trained men (body mass, 87.7 ± 11.2 kg and body height, 183.9 ± 6.4 cm) performed bench press (BP) throws (BPTs) using 3 types of loads against 30 to 80 kg. The validity of <i>F-V</i> relationship parameters was explored with respect to the tests used traditionally for force (maximal voluntary contraction and 1-repetition maximum [1RM]), velocity (maximal velocity achieved during almost unloaded tasks), and power (BPT against the 50%1RM and medicine ball throws) assessment.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The <i>W + I</i> loading promoted the highest values of <i>F</i><sub>0</sub> and <i>P</i><sub>max</sub>, while the highest magnitude of <i>V</i><sub>0</sub> was promoted by the <i>I</i> loading. The validity was acceptable for <i>F</i><sub>0</sub> obtained using the 3 loading conditions with respect to the BP 1RM (<i>r</i> range, 0.30-0.83), and <i>V</i><sub>0</sub> obtained using the <i>I</i> loading with respect to the stick throw (<i>r</i> = 0.54).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The magnitude of the <i>F-V</i> relationship parameters is affected by load type, but their validity with respect to standardized tests is comparable, with the exception of the higher validity of <i>V</i><sub>0</sub> when obtained using the <i>I</i> loading.</p><p><strong>Clinical relevance: </strong>Any load type can be used for assessing <i>F</i><sub>0</sub>, while <i>I</i> load should be selected when assessing <i>V</i><sub>0</sub>.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54276,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Sports Health-A Multidisciplinary Approach\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11195856/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Sports Health-A Multidisciplinary Approach\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/19417381231182131\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/6/21 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SPORT SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sports Health-A Multidisciplinary Approach","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/19417381231182131","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/6/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SPORT SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景：力-速度（F-V）关系模型作为一种肌肉机械评估工具广受欢迎。然而，F-V 关系参数（最大理论力[F0]、速度[V0]和功率[Pmax]）的有效性是否会受到不同负荷类型的影响尚不清楚：重力负荷（W，橡皮筋向下拉杠铃）、惯性负荷（I，橡皮筋向上拉杠铃，与增加的平板重量相等）和组合负荷（W + I，平板重量）：假设：负荷类型会影响 F-V 关系参数的大小和有效性。使用 W 负载时，F0 的幅度和有效性最高；使用 I 负载时，V0 的幅度和有效性最高；使用 W + I 负载时，Pmax 的幅度和有效性最高：研究设计：横断面：证据等级：3 级：共有 13 名接受过阻力训练的男性（体重为 87.7 ± 11.2 千克，身高为 183.9 ± 6.4 厘米）使用 30 至 80 千克的 3 种负荷进行卧推 (BP) 掷远 (BPT)。针对传统用于力量（最大自主收缩和单次最大负重[1RM]）、速度（在几乎无负荷任务中达到的最大速度）和力量（针对 50%单次最大负重的卧推和药球投掷）评估的测试，探讨了 F-V 关系参数的有效性：W + I 负荷可提高 F0 和 Pmax 的最高值，而 I 负荷可提高 V0 的最高值。使用这三种负荷条件获得的与 BP 1RM 有关的 F0 值（r 范围为 0.30-0.83）和使用 I 负荷获得的与投掷木棒有关的 V0 值（r = 0.54）的有效性是可以接受的：结论：F-V 关系参数的大小受负荷类型的影响，但它们与标准化测试的有效性相当，使用 I 负荷获得的 V0 的有效性更高：临床意义：任何负荷类型都可用于评估 F0，而评估 V0 时应选择 I 负荷。
Effects of Different Loading Types on the Validity and Magnitude of Force-Velocity Relationship Parameters.
Background: Force-velocity (F-V) relationship models gained popularity as a tool for muscle mechanical assessment. However, it is not clear whether the validity of the F-V relationship parameters (maximal theoretical force [F0], velocity [V0] and power [Pmax]) is affected using different load types: gravitational (W, rubber bands pulling the barbell downward), inertial (I, rubber bands pulling the barbell, which is equalized to the weight of the added plates upward), and combined (W + I, weight of the plates).
Hypothesis: Load type would affect both the magnitude and validity of F-V relationship parameters. The highest magnitude and validity was expected for F0 using a W, for V0 using an I, and for Pmax using a W + I load.
Study design: Cross-sectional.
Level of evidence: Level 3.
Methods: A total of 13 resistance-trained men (body mass, 87.7 ± 11.2 kg and body height, 183.9 ± 6.4 cm) performed bench press (BP) throws (BPTs) using 3 types of loads against 30 to 80 kg. The validity of F-V relationship parameters was explored with respect to the tests used traditionally for force (maximal voluntary contraction and 1-repetition maximum [1RM]), velocity (maximal velocity achieved during almost unloaded tasks), and power (BPT against the 50%1RM and medicine ball throws) assessment.
Results: The W + I loading promoted the highest values of F0 and Pmax, while the highest magnitude of V0 was promoted by the I loading. The validity was acceptable for F0 obtained using the 3 loading conditions with respect to the BP 1RM (r range, 0.30-0.83), and V0 obtained using the I loading with respect to the stick throw (r = 0.54).
Conclusion: The magnitude of the F-V relationship parameters is affected by load type, but their validity with respect to standardized tests is comparable, with the exception of the higher validity of V0 when obtained using the I loading.
Clinical relevance: Any load type can be used for assessing F0, while I load should be selected when assessing V0.
期刊介绍：
Sports Health: A Multidisciplinary Approach is an indispensable resource for all medical professionals involved in the training and care of the competitive or recreational athlete, including primary care physicians, orthopaedic surgeons, physical therapists, athletic trainers and other medical and health care professionals.
Published bimonthly, Sports Health is a collaborative publication from the American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine (AOSSM), the American Medical Society for Sports Medicine (AMSSM), the National Athletic Trainers’ Association (NATA), and the Sports Physical Therapy Section (SPTS).
The journal publishes review articles, original research articles, case studies, images, short updates, legal briefs, editorials, and letters to the editor.
Topics include:
-Sports Injury and Treatment
-Care of the Athlete
-Athlete Rehabilitation
-Medical Issues in the Athlete
-Surgical Techniques in Sports Medicine
-Case Studies in Sports Medicine
-Images in Sports Medicine
-Legal Issues
-Pediatric Athletes
-General Sports Trauma
-Sports Psychology
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
