Endurance Times of Trunk Muscles in Male Intercollegiate Rowers in Hong Kong

Chan, Romy H.

doi:10.1016/j.apmr.2005.04.007

Cited by 34 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Our test-retest reliability was lower compared with the study of initial standardization (26), and although the different criterion for test termination may be a factor for this, it is our opinion that the reliability results would have compared even less favorably as our pilot reliability testing using the previously established criterion was poorer than the criterion we implemented. Contacting the wedge was a criterion used in Chan's study (5). Although our mean time scores and SD were still longer than Chan (5), our times were more comparable to this study than the study of McGill et al (26).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 74%

“…The flexion time was notably longer in our study compared with previous studies (5,26) for both testing methods. Although the parameter for termination of the flexion test was previously established as breaking of the 60°angle (26), it did not clearly define the exact criterion for test termination (whether the test was terminated if the subject broke the plane at all or if the test was terminated when the subjects contacted the prefabricated wedge that was 10 cm behind them).…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 53%

“…Although our subjects were all college students, our age range was quite variable (22-38 years) and our mean age was greater than previous studies (20.52 6 1.16 years) for Chan (5) and (23 6 2.9 years) for McGill et al (26). Although the age ranges were not listed for other studies, our age range was quite large (22-38 years), which could also contribute to the variable fitness levels and test tolerance, therefore the greater variability in the flexion endurance scores and SD.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 47%

“…The large SD range on both of the flexion testing methods could be of concern, especially because it was higher than in previous studies (5,26). The fact that the SD was equal in both testing methods lends reasoning to the fact that the population studied, while all are college students, varied significantly in their athletic level of activities.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 73%

“…It could be reasonably concluded that because there was a great variation in the range of scores and the fact that both testing methods compared favorably, the large SD range could be most likely due to this variation in the level of physical activity. Although this is not ideal, especially for research analysis, this variation in physical activity level may actually be more representative of the general population than that noted in previous study populations (5,26).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 91%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Reliability of Alternative Trunk Endurance Testing Procedures Using Clinician Stabilization Vs. Traditional Methods

Reiman

Krier²,

Nelson³

et al. 2010

Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this study was to determine if a modified (MOD) testing method for previously established trunk endurance testing for flexion and extension is a reliable alternative. Fifty subjects were tested with the standard (ST) testing procedure and an MOD testing procedure on separate testing occasions 1 week apart. The testing procedure order and method of assessments were randomly selected and implemented. The MOD testing procedure used a clinician to provide stabilization as opposed to the ST method of belt stabilization. Interrater reliability for MOD procedures was 0.97 for extension and 0.93 for flexion. Correlation of the MOD procedure to the ST procedure was found to be 0.90 and 0.84 for extension and flexion, respectively. From this testing, it can be concluded in a sample of normal college-aged subjects that an MOD testing method for trunk flexion and extension endurance can reliably be used as compared with the previously accepted ST testing methods. From a practical application standpoint, this allows the use of an MOD testing procedure to be implemented in athletic training rooms and weight rooms that may not have appropriate tables for the ST testing and the fact that the MOD testing procedure will most likely require less time commitment and greater efficiency with testing of large groups of subjects.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 74%

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 53%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 47%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 73%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 91%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Reliability of Alternative Trunk Endurance Testing Procedures Using Clinician Stabilization Vs. Traditional Methods

Reiman

Krier²,

Nelson³

et al. 2010

Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Understanding the Biering-Sørensen test: Contributors to extensor endurance in young adults with and without a history of low back pain

Shaw,

Jacobs,

Van Dillen

et al. 2024

Journal of Electromyography and Kinesiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Isokinetic trunk flexion–extension protocol to assess trunk muscle strength and endurance: Reliability, learning effect, and sex differences

García-Vaquero

Barbado

Juan-Recio

et al. 2020

Journal of Sport and Health Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The purpose of this study was to examine the reliability and the learning effect of an isokinetic trunk flexion–extension protocol designed to simultaneously assess trunk muscle strength and endurance. In addition, the effect of the participants' sex on the reliability data was examined. Methods Fifty-seven healthy and physically active young men ( n = 28) and women ( n = 29) performed the isokinetic protocol 5 times, separated by a week between each of the first 4 sessions and by a month between the last 2 sessions. The protocol consisted of performing 4 trials of 15 maximum flexion–extension concentric exertions at 120°/s (range of trunk motion = 50°). The absolute and relative peak torque and total work were calculated to assess trunk flexion and extension strength. In addition, endurance ratio, modified endurance ratio, fatigue final ratio, recovery ratio, and modified recovery ratio variables were used for the assessment of trunk muscle endurance in both directions. Results Regarding the absolute reliability, no relevant changes were found between paired-comparison sessions for most strength and endurance variables, except for total work and relative total work variables in the flexion movement in both sexes. In addition, the typical error of the isokinetic variables was lower than 10% in both males and females, and minimum detectable changes ranged from 7% to 20%, with a tendency to be higher in females and in endurance variables. The strength variables showed high-to-excellent intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs; >0.74); however, for the endurance variables only the endurance ratio and the modified endurance ratio obtained moderate-to-high ICC values (0.57 < ICC < 0.82). In addition, the analysis of the variance reported no significant differences between consecutive pairs of sessions for most variables in both sexes. Conclusion Overall, these findings provide clinicians, trainers, and researchers with a 10-min single-session protocol to perform a reliable muscle strength and endurance evaluation of trunk flexor and extensor muscles, all within the same protocol.

show abstract

Endurance Times of Trunk Muscles in Male Intercollegiate Rowers in Hong Kong

Cited by 34 publications

References 15 publications

Reliability of Alternative Trunk Endurance Testing Procedures Using Clinician Stabilization Vs. Traditional Methods

Reliability of Alternative Trunk Endurance Testing Procedures Using Clinician Stabilization Vs. Traditional Methods

Understanding the Biering-Sørensen test: Contributors to extensor endurance in young adults with and without a history of low back pain

Isokinetic trunk flexion–extension protocol to assess trunk muscle strength and endurance: Reliability, learning effect, and sex differences

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About