Validity and reliability of velocity and power measures provided by the Vitruve linear position transducer
Metadatos
Mostrar el registro completo del ítemAutor
Ruiz Alías, Santiago Alejo; Şentürk, Deniz; Akyildiz, Zeki; Çetin, Onat; Kaya, Selman; Pérez Castilla, Alejandro; Jukic, IvanEditorial
PLOS ONE
Fecha
2024-10-24Referencia bibliográfica
Ruíz Alias, S.A. et. al. PLoS ONE 19(10): e0312348. [https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0312348]
Resumen
This study aimed to determine the validity and between-day reliability of the mean velocity
(MV), peak velocity (PV), mean power (MP), and peak power (PP) provided by the Vitruve linear
position transducer at different submaximal loads in the free-weight and Smith machine
back squat using GymAware as a reference point. Fourteen male sports science students
(free-weight back squat one-repetition maximum [1RM]: 132.5 ± 28.5 kg, Smith machine
back squat 1RM: 163.9 ± 30.4 kg) performed six experimental sessions, twice per week with
72 hours of rest. The first two included the assessment of the 1RM of both exercises. In the
four remaining, both linear position transducers were simultaneously used to record MV, PV,
MP, PP of each repetition during an incremental load test (i.e., 20, 40, 60, 80, 90% 1RM) with
three minutes of rest between sets. Vitruve displayed both fixed and proportional bias for certain
relative loads across all variables. Vitruve did not meet the validity criteria for all (MV, PP)
or at least two (MP, PV) relative loads (Coefficient of variation [CV] > 10%; Pearson correlation
< 0.70; Effect size > 0.60). MV, PV, MP, and PP recorded by Vitruve displayed acceptable
reliability (CV < 10%) with superior reliability observed during a Smith Machine
compared to free-weight back squat, and for velocity compared to power variables. Considering
GymAware as a reference point, Vitruve was not valid for measuring velocity and power
outcomes. Acceptable validity was observed only for PV in the Smith machine back squat,
while the other variables—regardless of relative loads and exercise modes—were mostly
inaccurate. All variables demonstrated acceptable reliability, with greater reliability noted in
the Smith machine compared to the free-weight back squat exercise mode.