Measuring what matters in isometric multi-joint rate of force development

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

This study aimed to evaluate responsiveness (ability to detect change) of isometric force-time measures to neuromuscular fatigue in resistance-trained participants using two differing protocols that modified both the instructions provided to participants and the duration of the test. Both protocols were completed at two knee joint angles in the isometric squat test. Ten participants volunteered to take part in this study (age: 27.0 ± 4.5 years, strength training experience: 7.7 ± 2.6 years). Isometric peak force (ISqTpeak) and isometric explosive force (ISqTexp) test protocols were assessed at two joint angles (knee angle 100° and 125°) pre-high intensity strength training, immediately post strength training, 24-h post, 48-h post and analysed for peak and RFD performance. Participants completed eight sets of three repetitions of the back-squat exercise as the high-intensity strength training. Results showed the highest standardised response means (SRM) detected was peak force using the ISqTpeak 100, SRM −1.97 compared to an SRM of −1.31 for RFD 200 ms in the ISqTexp 125. Peak force was the most responsive variable using the ISqTpeak protocol, whereas the ISqTexp protocol was most responsive for RFD measures. Therefore, ISqTpeak and ISqTexp test protocols should not be used interchangeably to evaluate RFD variables.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)2667-2675
Number of pages9
JournalJournal of Sports Sciences
Volume37
Issue number23
Early online date17 Aug 2019
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2 Dec 2019

Fingerprint

Resistance Training
Joints
Knee Joint
Fatigue

Keywords

  • responsiveness
  • explosive force
  • maximal strength
  • neuromuscular performance
  • Responsiveness

Cite this

@article{fc813891df8640fa8e27d624b6dfd95f,
title = "Measuring what matters in isometric multi-joint rate of force development",
abstract = "This study aimed to evaluate responsiveness (ability to detect change) of isometric force-time measures to neuromuscular fatigue in resistance-trained participants using two differing protocols that modified both the instructions provided to participants and the duration of the test. Both protocols were completed at two knee joint angles in the isometric squat test. Ten participants volunteered to take part in this study (age: 27.0 ± 4.5 years, strength training experience: 7.7 ± 2.6 years). Isometric peak force (ISqTpeak) and isometric explosive force (ISqTexp) test protocols were assessed at two joint angles (knee angle 100° and 125°) pre-high intensity strength training, immediately post strength training, 24-h post, 48-h post and analysed for peak and RFD performance. Participants completed eight sets of three repetitions of the back-squat exercise as the high-intensity strength training. Results showed the highest standardised response means (SRM) detected was peak force using the ISqTpeak 100, SRM −1.97 compared to an SRM of −1.31 for RFD 200 ms in the ISqTexp 125. Peak force was the most responsive variable using the ISqTpeak protocol, whereas the ISqTexp protocol was most responsive for RFD measures. Therefore, ISqTpeak and ISqTexp test protocols should not be used interchangeably to evaluate RFD variables.",
keywords = "responsiveness, explosive force, maximal strength, neuromuscular performance, Responsiveness",
author = "David Drake and Rodney Kennedy and E.S. Wallace",
year = "2019",
month = "12",
day = "2",
doi = "10.1080/02640414.2019.1654595",
language = "English",
volume = "37",
pages = "2667--2675",
journal = "Journal of Sports Sciences",
issn = "0264-0414",
number = "23",

}

Measuring what matters in isometric multi-joint rate of force development. / Drake, David; Kennedy, Rodney; Wallace, E.S.

In: Journal of Sports Sciences, Vol. 37, No. 23, 02.12.2019, p. 2667-2675.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Measuring what matters in isometric multi-joint rate of force development

AU - Drake, David

AU - Kennedy, Rodney

AU - Wallace, E.S.

PY - 2019/12/2

Y1 - 2019/12/2

N2 - This study aimed to evaluate responsiveness (ability to detect change) of isometric force-time measures to neuromuscular fatigue in resistance-trained participants using two differing protocols that modified both the instructions provided to participants and the duration of the test. Both protocols were completed at two knee joint angles in the isometric squat test. Ten participants volunteered to take part in this study (age: 27.0 ± 4.5 years, strength training experience: 7.7 ± 2.6 years). Isometric peak force (ISqTpeak) and isometric explosive force (ISqTexp) test protocols were assessed at two joint angles (knee angle 100° and 125°) pre-high intensity strength training, immediately post strength training, 24-h post, 48-h post and analysed for peak and RFD performance. Participants completed eight sets of three repetitions of the back-squat exercise as the high-intensity strength training. Results showed the highest standardised response means (SRM) detected was peak force using the ISqTpeak 100, SRM −1.97 compared to an SRM of −1.31 for RFD 200 ms in the ISqTexp 125. Peak force was the most responsive variable using the ISqTpeak protocol, whereas the ISqTexp protocol was most responsive for RFD measures. Therefore, ISqTpeak and ISqTexp test protocols should not be used interchangeably to evaluate RFD variables.

AB - This study aimed to evaluate responsiveness (ability to detect change) of isometric force-time measures to neuromuscular fatigue in resistance-trained participants using two differing protocols that modified both the instructions provided to participants and the duration of the test. Both protocols were completed at two knee joint angles in the isometric squat test. Ten participants volunteered to take part in this study (age: 27.0 ± 4.5 years, strength training experience: 7.7 ± 2.6 years). Isometric peak force (ISqTpeak) and isometric explosive force (ISqTexp) test protocols were assessed at two joint angles (knee angle 100° and 125°) pre-high intensity strength training, immediately post strength training, 24-h post, 48-h post and analysed for peak and RFD performance. Participants completed eight sets of three repetitions of the back-squat exercise as the high-intensity strength training. Results showed the highest standardised response means (SRM) detected was peak force using the ISqTpeak 100, SRM −1.97 compared to an SRM of −1.31 for RFD 200 ms in the ISqTexp 125. Peak force was the most responsive variable using the ISqTpeak protocol, whereas the ISqTexp protocol was most responsive for RFD measures. Therefore, ISqTpeak and ISqTexp test protocols should not be used interchangeably to evaluate RFD variables.

KW - responsiveness

KW - explosive force

KW - maximal strength

KW - neuromuscular performance

KW - Responsiveness

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85070935890&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/02640414.2019.1654595

DO - 10.1080/02640414.2019.1654595

M3 - Article

VL - 37

SP - 2667

EP - 2675

JO - Journal of Sports Sciences

JF - Journal of Sports Sciences

SN - 0264-0414

IS - 23

ER -