Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2025
Sit to stand is a new reliable method for assessing strength, power, and velocity exercise in adult pediatric cancer survivors.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Rodríguez-Perea Ángela, Jerez-Mayorga Daniel, Ubago-Guisado Esther, Marmol-Perez Andres, Jiménez-Lupión Daniel, Rodríguez-Solana Andrea, Rios Luis Javier Chirosa, Llorente-Cantarero Francisco J, Herrada-Robles María, Gracia-Marco Luis
Аннотация
PURPOSE: We aimed to analyze the intra-set reliability of 5 sit-to-stand (5-STS) exercises with a functional electromechanical dynamometer (FEMD) and to determine and compare the load-velocity (L-V) profile in the STS exercise in adult pediatric cancer survivors by sex, age, body mass index, and type and treatment of cancer.
METHOD: A total of 47 participants performed the 5-STS test with 5% and 20% body weight (BW) to assess intrasession reliability and analyze differences in L-V profiles by sex, age, BMI, and type and treatment of cancer.
RESULTS: Very high and extremely high relative reliability was found for both the 5% STS (ICC = 0.80-0.94) and the 20% STS (ICC = 0.87-0.95) relate to average and peak force, power, and velocity. Regarding L-V profiles, significant differences were only found in relation to sex for the velocity-axis intercept and area under the line (p < 0.05).
CONCLUSION: The 5-STS test with a load of 5% and 20% of BW using a FEMD is a reliable method for assessing strength, power, and velocity exercise in adult pediatric cancer survivors. There was a relation to sex for the variables of L-V profile.
IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Reliable assessments of muscular strength, like the 5-STS test using FEMD, offer a safer, less demanding alternative to maximal strength tests (e.g., 1RM), enabling precise intensity control and better-tailored rehabilitation programs.
METHOD: A total of 47 participants performed the 5-STS test with 5% and 20% body weight (BW) to assess intrasession reliability and analyze differences in L-V profiles by sex, age, BMI, and type and treatment of cancer.
RESULTS: Very high and extremely high relative reliability was found for both the 5% STS (ICC = 0.80-0.94) and the 20% STS (ICC = 0.87-0.95) relate to average and peak force, power, and velocity. Regarding L-V profiles, significant differences were only found in relation to sex for the velocity-axis intercept and area under the line (p < 0.05).
CONCLUSION: The 5-STS test with a load of 5% and 20% of BW using a FEMD is a reliable method for assessing strength, power, and velocity exercise in adult pediatric cancer survivors. There was a relation to sex for the variables of L-V profile.
IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Reliable assessments of muscular strength, like the 5-STS test using FEMD, offer a safer, less demanding alternative to maximal strength tests (e.g., 1RM), enabling precise intensity control and better-tailored rehabilitation programs.