4.4 Review

Multiple-Joint Isokinetic Dynamometry: A Critical Review

期刊

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000002982

关键词

reference values; reproducibility; linear; isokinetics

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Dvir, Z and Muller, S. Multiple-joint isokinetic dynamometry: a critical review. J Strength Cond Res 34(2): 587-601, 2020-Angular isokinetic dynamometry (AID) is widely regarded as the gold standard for dynamic muscle performance testing. Based on the rotational movement of its actuator, AID targets single-joint (knee, shoulder, hip, etc.) configurations namely measurement of muscle potential while it moves the lever arm-limb assembly ostensibly around a single fixed axis. On the other hand, the application of multiple-joint isokinetic dynamometry (MID) is relatively narrow, both in research and in practice. This situation is due, possibly, to the fact that these dynamometers are generally more limited in scope namely to testing/conditioning of combined hip, knee, ankle motion (leg press), combined shoulder, elbow motion, and lifting motion patterns, despite the fact that all 3 are associated with higher functionality. However, with the emerging importance of MID, this critical review takes a fresh look at its various aspects including the terminology and classification of multiple-joint isokinetic dynamometers; the problem of scaling namely the need to adjust the range of motion and linear velocities to subjective anthropometric measures; specific technical and methodological issues that underlie the valid application of these dynamometers; available reference values; and the reproducibility of MID-based test findings. Analysis of these topics indicates that MID may validly and effectively be applied for the assessment and conditioning of specific muscle action patterns. However, there is a clear need for standardization of tests and for conditioning protocols alongside research into the use of this method in various clinical cohorts.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据