Validation of an opto-electronic instrument for the measurement of weighted countermovement jump execution velocity

García-Orea, Guillermo Peña; Pedreño, Noelia Belando; Merino-Barrero, Juan Andrés; Jiménez-Ruiz, Abel; Heredia‐Elvar, Juan Ramón

doi:10.1080/14763141.2018.1526316

Cited by 11 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Pen˜a Garcı´a-Orea et al 21 also performed a validity study of VW during a loaded CMJ in a Smith Machine over a range of intensities, revealing that VW was a valid and reliable tool to measure CMJ velocity, when compared to T-F. However, these authors reported the absolute values for mean and peak velocity from each device and the concordance correlation coefficient instead of reporting fixed or proportional bias between devices.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…VW was launched in 2017 and there are currently three validation studies stating that this device is valid and reliable to assess movement velocity during freeweight HS and countermovement jump (CMJ). [19][20][21] However, from a profound examination of these studies, the authors detect some limitations that make this study necessary. It is crucial to consider that the VW device is a camera-based system, only able to assess movement velocity in two dimensions.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Finally, there is an important limitation in the statistical analyses used by two of the three existing studies validating VW. 20,21 While the ''gold standard'' method to assess movement velocity is the three-dimensional (3D) capture motion system, and not T-F, Model I linear regression analysis (e.g. least squared regression) should not be used since this statistical method does not assume a potential error in the reference method (T-F in this case).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Validity and reliability of an optoelectronic system to measure movement velocity during bench press and half squat in a Smith machine

Muñiz-Pardos

Lozano-Berges

Marín-Puyalto

et al. 2019

Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part P:

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this study was to determine the validity and reliability of a camera-based optoelectronic system to measure movement velocity during bench press and half squat at different load intensities. A total of 22 active males (age: 28.2 ± 3.9 years; one-repetition maximum bench press: 77.9 ± 19.0 kg; one-repetition maximum half squat: 116.6 ± 22.5 kg) participated in this study. After an initial one-repetition maximum testing session, participants performed five repetitions for each load (40%, 60% and 80% one-repetition maximum) and exercise (bench press and half squat) on a Smith machine in the second testing session. A third testing session was used for the test–retest reliability study. Time, displacement and mean propulsive velocity were simultaneously determined by the reference method (T-Force system) and the Velowin system. In bench press, ordinary least products regression analysis revealed low fixed biases for mean propulsive velocity at 40%, time at 60% and displacement at 80% one-repetition maximum (intercept = 0.065 m s−1, −28.02 ms and 0.87 cm, respectively). In half squat, low fixed biases were also detected for mean propulsive velocity at 40% and 80% one-repetition maximum (intercept = −0.040 and 0.023 m s−1, respectively), time at 40% and 60% one-repetition maximum (intercept = −53.05 and −101.85 ms, respectively) and displacement at 60% one-repetition maximum (intercept = −1.95 cm). Proportional bias was only observed for mean propulsive velocity at 80% bench press. In half squat, there was proportional bias for time and mean propulsive velocity at 40% one-repetition maximum, and also for time at 60% one-repetition maximum. The reliability test showed low and comparable fixed and proportional biases between systems across exercises and intensities. Velowin confirmed to be a valid and reliable system to measure movement velocity across a wide range of intensities (40%–80% one-repetition maximum) for two basic strength exercises through a robust statistical approach. Velowin would provide coaches and trainers with a suitable, affordable and easy-to-use equipment capable of measuring movement velocity in various exercises at different load intensities.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Validity and reliability of an optoelectronic system to measure movement velocity during bench press and half squat in a Smith machine

Muñiz-Pardos

Lozano-Berges

Marín-Puyalto

et al. 2019

Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part P:

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The VS can determine the angle formed by two bone segments (with three reference points: One joint axis and two references) or, alternatively, between a bone segment and the horizontal/vertical line drawn on the joint axis. Depending on the camera’s proximity to the joint, the system’s accuracy has been reported to be between 0.1° and 1° [16], without influencing other operating system properties.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In spite of being a handy and easy to use tool, the utility of the WiiRemote TM to track points is limited to certain lighting conditions and a sampling rate of 100 samples per second [14]; thus new optoelectronic systems have emerged [15,16]. The VeloFlex system (VS) (Deportec, Murcia, Spain) is a new tool that can track up to four markers and provides real-time feedback with zero latency time.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Optoelectronic System for Measuring the Range of Motion in Healthy Volunteers: A Cross-Sectional Study

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and Objectives: Within the clinical evaluation of multiple pathologies of the lower limb, the measurement of range of motion (ROM) of its joints is fundamental. To this end, there are various tools, from the goniometer as a reference to more recent devices such as inclinometry-based applications, photo capture applications, or motion capture systems. This study aimed to assess the validity, intra-rater, and inter-rater reliability of the VeloFlex system (VS), which is a new camera-based tool designed for tracking joint trajectories and measuring joint ROM. Materials and Methods: Thirty-five healthy volunteers (16 females; aged 18–61 years) participated in this study. All participants were assessed on two separate occasions, one week apart. During the first assessment session, measurements were obtained using a goniometer and the VS, whereas, in the second session, only the VS was used. In each assessment session, nine active movements were examined. For each movement, three trials were tested, and the mean of these three measures was used for analysis. To evaluate the concurrent validity and agreement, the Pearson correlation coefficient (r) and Bland-Altmann plots were used. Intra-rater and inter-rater reliability were evaluated using intra-class correlation (ICC), standard error of measurement (SEM), and minimal detectable change (MDC). Results: Both devices showed excellent correlations for all movements (r ranged from 0.992 to 0.999). The intra-rater reliability of the VS was excellent (ICC ranged from 0.93 to 0.99), SEMs ranged from 0.53% to 2.61% and the MDC ranged from 0.68° to 3.26°. The inter-rater reliability of the VS was also excellent (ICC ranged from 0.88 to 0.98), SEMs ranged from 0.81% to 4.76% and the MDC ranged from 2.27° to 4.42°. Conclusions: The VS is a valid and reliable tool for the measurement of ROM of lower limb joints in healthy subjects.

show abstract

The Validity and Reliability of Commercially Available Resistance Training Monitoring Devices: A Systematic Review

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Monitoring resistance training has a range of unique difficulties due to differences in physical characteristics and capacity between athletes, and the indoor environment in which it often occurs. Traditionally, methods such as volume load have been used, but these have inherent flaws. In recent times, numerous portable and affordable devices have been made available that purport to accurately and reliably measure kinetic and kinematic outputs, potentially offering practitioners a means of measuring resistance training loads with confidence. However, a thorough and systematic review of the literature describing the reliability and validity of these devices has yet to be undertaken, which may lead to uncertainty from practitioners on the utility of these devices. Objective A systematic review of studies that investigate the validity and/or reliability of commercially available devices that quantify kinetic and kinematic outputs during resistance training. Methods Following PRISMA guidelines, a systematic search of SPORTDiscus, Web of Science, and Medline was performed; studies included were (1) original research investigations; (2) full-text articles written in English; (3) published in a peer-reviewed academic journal; and (4) assessed the validity and/or reliability of commercially available portable devices that quantify resistance training exercises. Results A total of 129 studies were retrieved, of which 47 were duplicates. The titles and abstracts of 82 studies were screened and the full text of 40 manuscripts were assessed. A total of 31 studies met the inclusion criteria. Additional 13 studies, identified via reference list assessment, were included. Therefore, a total of 44 studies were included in this review. Conclusion Most of the studies within this review did not utilise a gold-standard criterion measure when assessing validity. This has likely led to under or overreporting of error for certain devices. Furthermore, studies that have quantified intra-device reliability have often failed to distinguish between technological and biological variability which has likely altered the true precision of each device. However, it appears linear transducers which have greater accuracy and reliability compared to other forms of device. Future research should endeavour to utilise gold-standard criterion measures across a broader range of exercises (including weightlifting movements) and relative loads.

show abstract

Validation of an opto-electronic instrument for the measurement of weighted countermovement jump execution velocity

Cited by 11 publications

References 34 publications

Validity and reliability of an optoelectronic system to measure movement velocity during bench press and half squat in a Smith machine

Validity and reliability of an optoelectronic system to measure movement velocity during bench press and half squat in a Smith machine

An Optoelectronic System for Measuring the Range of Motion in Healthy Volunteers: A Cross-Sectional Study

The Validity and Reliability of Commercially Available Resistance Training Monitoring Devices: A Systematic Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About