4.3 Article

Reliability and performance-dependent variations of muscle function variables during isometric knee extension

Journal

JOURNAL OF ELECTROMYOGRAPHY AND KINESIOLOGY
Volume 18, Issue 2, Pages 262-269

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jelekin.2006.08.013

Keywords

reliability; knee extensors; electromyography; twitch interpolation; muscle endurance; reaction time

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Despite the common use of standardised methods analysing neuromuscular function during knee extension, there is a lack of test-retest reliability studies. Furthermore, for most of the investigated variables it is unknown which changes of values indicate an enhancement of performance. The aim of the present study was to investigate performance-dependent variations of muscle functions during isometric contraction of knee extensors and to examine test-retest reliability of their measurement methods. For test-retest reliability sports students completed three test sessions. Highly skilled athletes, sports students and untrained subjects were investigated to determine the performance-dependent variations. The following variables were analysed: maximal voluntary contraction (MVC), voluntary activation (VA), absolute muscle reaction time (AR), muscle endurance (ME), and EMG frequency analysis (MF) of in. vastus lateralis (VL), in. vastus medialis (VM) and in. rectus femoris (RF). Results test-retest-reliability: A high reliability between session I vs. 2 and session 2 vs. 3 was shown for MVC (ICC = 0.92 and .97), VA (0.92/0.95) and ME (0.87/0.95). ICC in AR (0.23) was low between the first and second session and moderate between the second and third session (0.74). MF of VL, VM and RF showed low ICC between sessions. Performance dependent variations: Significant differences in nearly all variables (except VA) were found between trained (athletes and sports students) and untrained subjects. (C) 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available