Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorFernandes, John*
dc.contributor.authorLamb, Kevin L.*
dc.contributor.authorClark, Cain*
dc.contributor.authorMoran, Jason*
dc.contributor.authorDrury, Ben*
dc.contributor.authorGarcia-Ramos, Amador*
dc.contributor.authorTwist, Craig*
dc.date.accessioned2019-02-18T15:39:55Z
dc.date.available2019-02-18T15:39:55Z
dc.date.issued2018-11-05
dc.identifier.citationFernandes, J. F. T., Lamb, K. L., Clark, C. T. T., Moran, J., Drury, B., Carcia Ramos, A. & Twist, C. (2018). A comparison of the FitroDyne and GymAware rotary encoders for quantifying peak and mean velocity during traditional multi-jointed exercises. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000002952
dc.identifier.issn1064-8011
dc.identifier.doi10.1519/JSC.0000000000002952
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10034/621888
dc.descriptionThis document is the Accepted Manuscript version of a published work that appeared in final form in Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. To access the final edited and published work see https://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0000000000002952
dc.description.abstractThe FitroDyne and GymAware rotary encoders are being increasingly used in resistance training to monitor movement velocity, but how closely their velocity outcomes agree is unknown. Consequently, this study aimed to determine the level of agreement between the FitroDyne and GymAware for the assessment of movement velocity in three resistance training exercises. Fifteen males performed three repetitions of bench press, back squat and bent-over-row exercises at 10% one repetition maximum increments (from 20 to 80%). For each repetition, the FitroDyne and GymAware recorded peak and mean barbell velocity (cm.s-1). Though strongly correlated (r = 0.79 to 1.00), peak velocity values for the GymAware were significantly lower than the FitroDyne for all exercises and loads. Importantly, the random errors between the devices, quantified via Bland and Altman's 95% limits of agreement, were unacceptable, ranging from ± 3.8 to 25.9 cm.s-1. Differences in mean velocity were smaller (and non-significant for most comparisons) and highly correlated (r = 0.86 to 1.00) between devices. Notwithstanding smaller random errors than for the peak values, mean values still reflected poor agreement (random errors between ± 2.1 to 12.0 cm.s-1). These findings suggest that the FitroDyne and GymAware cannot record peak or mean velocity with acceptable agreement, and should neither be employed interchangeably nor their data compared.
dc.language.isoenen
dc.publisherNational Strength and Conditioning Associationen_US
dc.relation.urlhttps://insights.ovid.com/crossref?an=00124278-900000000-95070en_US
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/en_US
dc.subjectvalidityen_US
dc.subjectagreementen_US
dc.subjectbench pressen_US
dc.subjectsquaten_US
dc.titleA comparison of the FitroDyne and GymAware rotary encoders for quantifying peak and mean velocity during traditional multi-jointed exercisesen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.eissn1533-4287
dc.contributor.departmentUniversity of Chester & Hartpury University
dc.identifier.journalJournal of Strength and Conditioning Researchen_US
or.grant.openaccessYesen_US
rioxxterms.funderUnfundeden_US
rioxxterms.identifier.projectUnfundeden_US
rioxxterms.versionAMen_US
rioxxterms.versionofrecordhttps://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0000000000002952
rioxxterms.licenseref.startdate2019-11-05
refterms.dateFCD2019-02-04T09:09:59Z
refterms.versionFCDAM
refterms.dateFOA2019-11-01T00:00:00Z
rioxxterms.publicationdate2018-11-05
dc.dateAccepted2018-09-23
dc.date.deposited2019-02-18


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
JSCR (2018) Accepted paper.pdf
Size:
298.2Kb
Format:
PDF
Request:
Main article

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/