Abstract

ABSTRACT Accuracy and test–retest reliability were assessed for two devices, PUSH Band 2.0 (PUSH) and Speed4lifts. Two identical sessions were performed 6–8 days apart. Twenty rugby league players performed three repetitions with 20%, 40%, 60% and 80% of estimated one repetition maximum for back squat (BS), front squat (FS), and bench press (BP). Velocity was recorded using PUSH, Speed4lifts and 3D motion analysis system (gold standard). Passing-Bablok regression analysis assessed agreement of velocity measures with the gold standard. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) and coefficients of variation (CV) assessed test–retest reliability. PUSH and Speed4lifts were accurate for BS velocities <1.00 m/s and FS velocities <0.65 m/s. PUSH was accurate for BP velocities <0.65 m/s. Speed4lifts was accurate for BP velocities between 0.65–1.00 m/s. PUSH was reliable at all loads (ICC = 0.79–0.92; CV = 2.63–6.89%) except for 20% FS and BP (ICC = 0.49–0.64; CV = 3.13–3.62%). Speed4lifts was reliable at all loads (ICC = 0.70–0.96; CV = 2.57–4.26%) except for 20% BP (ICC = 0.59; CV = 4.59%). These results suggest that both devices are unsuitable for measuring the velocity of BS, FS and BP at faster velocities and at lighter loads.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call