Assessment of the two-point method applied in field conditions for routine testing of muscle mechanical capacities in a leg cycle ergometer

Abstract

Purpose

The aim of this study was to compare the reliability and magnitude of the force–velocity (F–V) relationship parameters [maximum force (F0), maximum velocity (V0), F–V slope, and maximum power (P0)] obtained through the application of only two loads (i.e., two-point method) vs. six loads (i.e., multiple-point method).

Methods

Ten physically active men (age 19.5 ± 0.9 years, body mass 79.0 ± 9.0 kg, height 183.9 ± 8.4 cm) conducted four testing sessions after a preliminary familiarization session with the leg cycle ergometer exercise. In a counterbalanced order, subjects performed two sessions of the multiple-point method (six loads applied for the F–V modeling) over 1 week and two sessions of the two-point method (only the lightest and heaviest loads were applied) over another week.

Results

The main findings revealed that (I) the reliability of the F–V relationship parameters was very high and generally of comparable magnitude for both the multiple- [coefficient of variation (CV) range 1.91–3.94%; intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) range 0.72–0.99] and two-point methods [CV range 1.41–4.62%; ICC range 0.76–0.95], (II) the magnitude of the same parameters obtained from both methods was highly correlated (r > 0.80), and (III) the P0 assessed from the multiple-point method was significantly lower than the obtained from the two-point method [P = 0.041; effect size (ES) 0.36] due to a significant decrease in F0 (P = 0.039; ES 0.41) with no significant differences observed for V0 (P = 0.570; ES − 0.15).

Conclusions

These results support the two-point method as a reliable, valid, and fatigue-free procedure of assessing the muscle mechanical capacities through the F–V relationship.

from Physiology via xlomafota13 on Inoreader https://ift.tt/2K80eVC
via IFTTT