These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Relationship between performance-based and laboratory tests for lower-limb muscle strength and power assessment in healthy older women.
    Author: Forte R, Macaluso A.
    Journal: J Sports Sci; 2008 Nov; 26(13):1431-6. PubMed ID: 18923959.
    Abstract:
    The aim of the study was to assess the relationship between performance-based and laboratory tests for muscular strength and power assessment in older women. Thirty-two women aged 68.8 +/- 2.8 years were recruited. All participants were asessed for: (a) two performance-based tests--the box-stepping test (mean 296 +/- 51 J) and two-revolution maximum test (mean 7.1 +/- 2 kg) performed while pedalling on a cycle ergometer; and (b) muscular function tests--maximal instantaneous peak power jumping on a force platform (mean 1528 +/- 279 W); maximal voluntary contraction (MVC) during knee extension (mean 601 +/- 571 N) and leg press (mean 626 +/- 126 N), and leg press power (mean 483 +/- 98 W) on a dynamometer. Using univariate analysis, performance-based tests were compared with laboratory muscle strength and power measurements. Muscle power correlated most strongly with the performance-based tests for both jumping and leg press power (r-values between 0.67 and 0.75; P < 0.01). The correlation with muscle strength measures ranged between 0.48 and 0.61 (P < 0.01). The proposed tests may have particular relevance in geriatric and rehabilitation environments as they represent an easy, practical, and inexpensive alternative for the assessment of muscular strength and power.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]