Refine
Has Fulltext
- no (2) (remove)
Document Type
- Article (2)
Language
- English (2)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (2)
Keywords
- validity (2) (remove)
Institute
Isokinetic dynamometry is a standard technique for strength testing and training. Nevertheless reliability and validity is limited due to inertia effects, especially for high velocities. Therefore in a first methodological approach the purpose was to evaluate a new isokinetic measurement mode including inertia compensation compared to a classic isokinetic measurement mode for single and multijoint movements at different velocities.
Isokinetic maximum strength measurements were carried out in 26 healthy active subjects. Tests were performed using classic isokinetic and new isokinetic mode in random order. Maximum torque/force, maximum movement velocity and time for acceleration were calculated. For inter-instrument agreement Bland and Altman analysis, systematic and random error was quantified. Differences between both methods were assessed (ANOVA alpha = 0.05).
Bland and Altman analysis showed the highest agreement between the two modes for strength and velocity measurements (bias: < +/- 1.1%; LOA: < 14.2%) in knee flexion/extension at slow isokinetic velocity (60 degrees/s). Least agreement (range: bias: -67.6% +/- 119.0%; LOA: 53.4% 69.3%) was observed for shoulder/arm test at high isokinetic velocity (360 degrees/s). The Isokin(new) mode showed higher maximum movement velocities (p < 0.05).
For low isokinetic velocities the new mode agrees with the classic mode. Especially at high isokinetic velocities the new isokinetic mode shows relevant benefits coupled with a possible trade-off with the force/torque measurement. In conclusion, this study offers for the first time a comparison between the 'classical' and inertia-compensated isokinetic dynamometers indicating the advantages and disadvantages associated with each individual approach, particularly as they relate to medium or high velocities in testing and training.
Background: Isokinetic measurements are widely used to assess strength capacity in a clinical or research context. Nevertheless, the validity of isokinetic measures for identifying strength deficits and the evaluation of therapeutic process regarding different pathologies is yet to be established. Therefore, the purpose of this review is to evaluate the validity of isokinetic measures in a specific case: that of muscular capacity in low back pain (LBP).
Methods: A literature search (PubMed; ISI Web of Knowledge; The Cochrane Library) covering the last 10 years was performed. Relevant papers regarding isokinetic trunk strength measures in healthy and patients with low back pain (PLBP) were searched. Peak torque values [Nm] and peak torque normalized to body weight [Nm/kg BW] were extracted for healthy and PLBP. Ranked mean values across studies were calculated for the concentric peak torque at 60 degrees/s as well as the flexion/extension (F/E) ratio.
Results: 34 publications (31 flexion/extension; 3 rotation) were suitable for reporting detailed isokinetic strength measures in healthy or LBP (untrained adults, adolescents, athletes). Adolescents and athletes were different compared to normal adults in terms of absolute trunk strength values and the F/E ratio. Furthermore, isokinetic measures evaluating therapeutic process and isokinetic rehabilitation training were infrequent in literature (8 studies).
Conclusion: Isokinetic measurements are valid for measuring trunk flexion/extension strength and F/E ratio in athletes, adolescents and (untrained) adults with/without LBP. The validity of trunk rotation is questionable due to a very small number of publications whereas no reliable source regarding lateral flexion could be traced. Therefore, isokinetic dynamometry may be utilized for identifying trunk strength deficits in healthy adults and PLBP.