Physical therapy in sport : official journal of the Association of Chartered Physiotherapists in Sports Medicine · 2021
The concurrent validity and intrarater reliability of a hand-held dynamometer for the assessment of neck strength in semi-professional rugby union players.
СтатьяНаблюдательное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Ashall Adam, Dobbin Nick, Thorpe Cari
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: The main objective of this study was to determine the concurrent validity between a hand-held (HHD) and mounted hand-held dynamometer (MHHD) for assessing isometric neck strength.
DESIGN: Observational design.
SETTING: Semiprofessional rugby club.
PARTICIPANTS: Nineteen semi-professional rugby players (age = 26 ± 5 years, stature = 186.5 ± 6.5 cm, body mass = 98.7 ± 12.8 kg).
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Concurrent validity (limits of agreement, correlation) between HHD and MHHD, the intrarater reliability (intra-class correlation, ICC) and comparison between playing positions.
RESULTS: Absolute peak and mean peak force were systematically lower when using the HHD compared to MHHD, with the mean bias ranging from -1.8 to -3.8 kgf (P < 0.05). Differences were not evident for flexion when applying the correction equations (-0.5 to 2.1 kgf, P > 0.05) but remained for extension. Correlations between methods were large-to-very large; the ICCs for both methods were good (ICC = 0.72-0.89), with no difference between positions (P < 0.05).
CONCLUSION: The concurrent validity of HHD was considered acceptable when compared to the MHHD and the correction equation applied. Both methods are reliable and useful for assessing neck strength in rugby players, though, caution is needed when determining strength during neck extension.
DESIGN: Observational design.
SETTING: Semiprofessional rugby club.
PARTICIPANTS: Nineteen semi-professional rugby players (age = 26 ± 5 years, stature = 186.5 ± 6.5 cm, body mass = 98.7 ± 12.8 kg).
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Concurrent validity (limits of agreement, correlation) between HHD and MHHD, the intrarater reliability (intra-class correlation, ICC) and comparison between playing positions.
RESULTS: Absolute peak and mean peak force were systematically lower when using the HHD compared to MHHD, with the mean bias ranging from -1.8 to -3.8 kgf (P < 0.05). Differences were not evident for flexion when applying the correction equations (-0.5 to 2.1 kgf, P > 0.05) but remained for extension. Correlations between methods were large-to-very large; the ICCs for both methods were good (ICC = 0.72-0.89), with no difference between positions (P < 0.05).
CONCLUSION: The concurrent validity of HHD was considered acceptable when compared to the MHHD and the correction equation applied. Both methods are reliable and useful for assessing neck strength in rugby players, though, caution is needed when determining strength during neck extension.