Searching for just a few words should be enough to get started. If you need to make more complex queries, use the tips below to guide you.
Article type: Research Article
Authors: Dervišević, Edvina | Hadžić, Vedrana | Karpljuk, Damira | Radjo, Izetb
Affiliations: [a] University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Sport, Ljubljana, Slovenia | [b] University of Sarajevo, Faculty of Sport and Physical Education, Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina
Note: [] Address for correspondence: Edvin Dervišević, MD, PhD, University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Sport, Department of Sports Medicine, Gortanova 22 Street, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia. Tel.: +386 41 341 790; E-mail: edvin.dervisevic@guest.arnes.si
Abstract: Objective: To evaluate bilateral quadriceps and hamstrings strength, at two different ranges of motion (RoM): 30° (SRoM) and 90° (FRoM), using different angular velocities. Background: Recent studies have indicated that short RoM isokinetic testing of knee muscles yielded strength findings that were compatible with those derived from a much larger RoM. However, findings were based on a single adjusted velocity in each of the RoMs. Method: Sixteen healthy male students volunteered to participate in this study. Two testing sessions, a week apart, were performed. In the first session testing started with a RoM of 90° (FRoM, 0° – full extension) and angular velocities of 60 and 180°/s. Measurements related to concentric (quadriceps and hamstring) and eccentric (quadriceps only) contractions. In the second part of the test, the RoM was adjusted to 30° (SRoM, 30–60° knee flexion) with velocities of 30 and 60°/s, respectively. The order of RoM testing was reversed in the second session. All tests were conducted bilaterally. Results: Both FRoM- and SRoM-based scores have shown good reproducibility based on the Bland Altman plots and low values of standard error of measurement and coefficient of variance of standard deviation. No statistically significant differences were noted between the FRoM and SRoM-based strength scores. The results suggest that range of motion used in isokinetic testing alone or in combination with other factors, namely side tested and isokinetic velocity, does not significantly influences changes in peak torque values for both quadriceps and hamstrings. Conclusion: This study suggests that SRoM isokinetic testing provides an effective alternative to the commonly applied range.
DOI: 10.3233/IES-2006-0236
Journal: Isokinetics and Exercise Science, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 269-278, 2006
IOS Press, Inc.
6751 Tepper Drive
Clifton, VA 20124
USA
Tel: +1 703 830 6300
Fax: +1 703 830 2300
sales@iospress.com
For editorial issues, like the status of your submitted paper or proposals, write to editorial@iospress.nl
IOS Press
Nieuwe Hemweg 6B
1013 BG Amsterdam
The Netherlands
Tel: +31 20 688 3355
Fax: +31 20 687 0091
info@iospress.nl
For editorial issues, permissions, book requests, submissions and proceedings, contact the Amsterdam office info@iospress.nl
Inspirees International (China Office)
Ciyunsi Beili 207(CapitaLand), Bld 1, 7-901
100025, Beijing
China
Free service line: 400 661 8717
Fax: +86 10 8446 7947
china@iospress.cn
For editorial issues, like the status of your submitted paper or proposals, write to editorial@iospress.nl
如果您在出版方面需要帮助或有任何建, 件至: editorial@iospress.nl