The Interday Measurement Consistency of and Relationships Between Hamstring and Leg Musculo-articular Stiffness.

Abstract

Hamstring stiffness (K(HAM)) and leg stiffness (K(LEG)) are commonly examined relative to athletic performance and injury risk. Given these may be modifiable, it is important to understand day-to-day variations inherent in these measures before use in training studies. In addition, the extent to which K(HAM) and K(LEG) measure similar active stiffness characteristics has not been established. We investigated the interday measurement consistency of K(HAM) and K(LEG), and examined the extent to which K(LEG) predicted K(HAM) in 6 males and 9 females. K(HAM) was moderately consistent day-to-day (ICC(2,5) = .71; SEM = 76.3 N·m(-1)), and 95% limits of agreement (95% LOA) revealed a systematic bias with considerable absolute measurement error (95% LOA = 89.6 ± 224.8 N·m(-1)). Day-to-day differences in procedural factors explained 59.4% of the variance in day-to-day differences in K(HAM). Bilateral and unilateral K(LEG) was more consistent (ICC(2,3) range = .87-.94; SEM range = 1.0-2.91 kN·m(-1)) with lower absolute error (95% LOA bilateral= -2.0 ± 10.3; left leg = -0.36 ± 3.82; right leg = -1.05 ± 3.61 kN·m(-1)). K(LEG) explained 44% of the variance in K(HAM) (P < .01). Findings suggest that procedural factors must be carefully controlled to yield consistent and precise K(HAM) measures. The ease and consistency of K(LEG), and moderate correlation with K(HAM), may steer clinicians toward K(LEG) when measuring lower-extremity stiffness for screening studies and monitoring the effectiveness of training interventions over time.