English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Open

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Insights

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Abslract . S/lidy (Ies/gll: A corrcJ;;llion slUdy 10 delcmline Ihe relati onship of the results of linear isokinctk Icsti ng and various fUllctionultest s. Objeclil·cs: To detennine the relation shi p of scores on a linear isokiuetic test 10 scores on a ' ·<lriCI), of lower extremity functional tests. Background: Both isokinetic testing aud functional tests arc commonly used during the rehabilitation of individual s wilh sports <l nd orthopedic injuries. Limited inforll1ation exists regarding the re1<1tionships of scores on a linear isokinetk lesl and scores on functionallesls. M ethods all(/ measures: Twenty-nine hC<ll1hy subjccts perfonned a n:locity spectrum linear isokinetic test consist in g of 3 sets in <I bilateral rec ipmc<ll Ill ode. followed by three scl~ in a bilateml coupled mode. Testing ,·elocities were 25A. 50.8 <lml 76.2 cm per se cond. Six Ill<l.\im<ll volitionul1inear isokinet ic repetitions were perfonlled at e:lch testing velocity. Following linear isokinetic testing. su bjects perfonned 5 funct ional tests: bi lateral leg ,·ertical jump. unilat eral leg venic:lI jump. double legjump for distance. si ngle.leg hop for distance. an d single.leg limed 6·meter hop. Functional testing ent:likd 3 lI1<1xilll<ll volitional attempts of the 5 procedures for both the dominant and non·dominant lower extremity. The me<ln of the 3 al1empl~ was used for c:llculmions. Memls and sl:ln d:lrd devimions of the func tion:!1 test scores :lnd isokinelic lesl scores were detemlined us in g sl:lndard st<lliSl ic<l1 procedures. PC<lTSon product moment cOTTei<Jtion cocfficiems were used to detemline the rel:ltiollsh ip between the mean scores onlhc linc<lr iso kinctic test scorcs <lnd funct ion<llteSls for both Ihe dominam ami non-dominant limbs. Re.\JI/ts: Twellly-Ih ree OUI of 36 cOTTel<llion cocfficielll!; were significan t at the p < 0.01 level. whi Ie 12 OUI of 36 were significant at the p < 0.05 lel'el. Only l out of 36 was non-significant when comparing bilateral rcci proc<ll scores 10 single.leg functional te, 1 scores. The bilater<ll reciproc<l l cOTTelation coefficients ranged from -0.36 to 0 .65. Six OUI of 12 bilmer.J1 coupled correlation coefficienlS were s ignificant at p < 0.0 1. while 3 out of 12 were signific:lnl al ~he JJ <: 0_05 1.,,·.,1 and only 3 were cO ll ,idered non -significant. The bilmeral coupled cOTTelation coefficicnts rang.,d from 0 .11 100.64. COllell/siolls: Re sults from this slU dy indica te :! signific:l 1II rel :ltionship exists belween the re sullS of linear iso kinetic !esti ng <lnd various function:lllesis. Despite the signific <llll rel <ltionshi p. Ihe m<ljorit)' of Pearson Product mome nt correl:ltion coefficienlS were in the low to moder<lte ra nge. Thcrefore. Ihe usc of either a line:lr isokinetic test or a functional test in isolat ion 10 detemline strength :llld perform:lnce is strongly discouraged. LinC<lr isokinelic testing should be used for testing lower e"trem ity slrength. while functi on<ll tests should be used to dete mline pc rfoml<lncc le,·els. The authors recoJllmend lIIilizing both testing m~thods since Slrengl h docs nOi <llwa)'$ cOTTelate strongly with ph)'sieal perfonnance.

Address

About

Learn

Download the Zendy App

Discover

Explore