Validation of the Repetitions in Reserve Rating Scale in Paralympic Powerlifting Athletes

Abstract

The present study aimed to validate the perceived exertion scale based on the repetitions in reserve (RIR) of Paralympic Powerlifting (PP) athletes. Twenty-one PP athletes were assessed in the one-maximum repetition test (1RM) of the bench press exercise, maximum repetition strength tests with loads corresponding to 90, 85, 80, and 75% of 1RM, and 4-repetitions strength tests (4-repST) with 100, 90, 85, 80, and 75% of the 1RM. The RIR scale was assessed after each set of the 4-repST and compared to the 1RM and maximum strength tests. For criterion validity, the total estimated repetition was significantly lower compared to the maximum strength test repetitions in the lower scores of the RIR scale (median=7.0 vs. 9.0 for 75% of 1RM). The total estimated repetition correlation with maximum strength was very high and significant (ICC=0.91). Using the Bland and Altman method, the difference between means was 0.9 reps, and the interval around differences was 6.4 reps. For construct validity, and the RIR scale presented high correlation with 1RM intensities (rho=0.86, p≤0.05). The RIR scale was validated and coaches and sports trainers can use this monitoring tool to ensure submaximal loads when improving lift technique, which is extremely rigorous in PP.

A Bibliometrics-Enhanced, PAGER-Compliant Scoping Review of the Literature on Paralympic Powerlifting: Insights for Practices and Future Research

“…Seven studies [ 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 ] were excluded with reason ( n = 2, not reporting sufficient details; n = 5, not disaggregating data according to para-sports discipline). Finally, 37 studies [ 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54 , 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 , 59 , 60 , 61 , 62 ] were retained in the present scoping review. We found that the included studies focused on a range of aspects involving health, classification, the etiology of injuries, and performance.…”

“…Six studies [ 57 , 58 , 59 , 60 , 61 , 62 ] developed new analytical/statistical approaches for kinematics assessments and predictions of mechanical outputs in strength exercises. The Functional ANOVA (FANOVA) model is a generalized regression model, with logistic, probit, and Poisson regression as special cases.…”

“…Specifically, the RIR-based scale values are 10, 9.5, 9, 8.5, 8, 7.5, 7, 5–6, 3–4, and 1–2 and are associated with 0, 0.5, 1, 1, 5, 2, 2.5, 3, 5, 6, and 7 repetitions (repetition estimate), respectively. Neto et al [ 62 ] validated the RIR-based scale in a sample of 20 PP. In this study, participants were asked to perform a minimum of one repetition and up to a maximum of 4 for each different intensity (100%, 90%, 85%, 80%, and 75% of 1RM), and after each test, the RIR-based scale was evaluated.…”

“…Methodological and statistical advancements [ 57 , 58 , 59 , 60 , 61 , 62 ] have enabled a better assessment of performance outcomes, for which classical approaches relying on the null-hypothesis significant statistic may be misleading. A few studies have utilized the magnitude-based inference (MBI) model, which seems to be a promising and better statistical proposition compared with conventional inferential statistics to quantitatively analyze and interpret sports performance outcomes.…”

“…The study that examined the relationships between different loading intensities and movement velocities was able to accurately predict the maximum of one repetition. Furthermore, another practicable alternative for regular load monitoring was the RIR-based scale [ 62 ].…”