Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Discrimination between maximal and submaximal effort in lumbar dynamometry.

Miriam M R Hutten1, Majon T H Muller, Hermie J Hermens

  • 1Roessingh Research and Development, Enschede, The Netherlands.

Clinical Biomechanics (Bristol, Avon)
|June 21, 2001
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Continuous QTc Monitoring for Patients Intoxicated with QTc Prolonging Medication in the Emergency Department: A Proof of Principle Study.

The Journal of emergency medicine·2025
Same author

Attrition of older adults in web-based health interventions: Survival analysis within an observational cohort study.

Journal of health psychology·2024
Same author

Consequences of Data Loss on Clinical Decision-Making in Continuous Glucose Monitoring: Retrospective Cohort Study.

Interactive journal of medical research·2024
Same author

Missing Data Statistics Provide Causal Insights into Data Loss in Diabetes Health Monitoring by Wearable Sensors.

Sensors (Basel, Switzerland)·2024
Same author

Early Warning Scores to Support Continuous Wireless Vital Sign Monitoring for Complication Prediction in Patients on Surgical Wards: Retrospective Observational Study.

JMIR perioperative medicine·2023
Same author

Missing data imputation techniques for wireless continuous vital signs monitoring.

Journal of clinical monitoring and computing·2023

This study found that maximum and preferred effort trunk performance are equally consistent. While small differences exist between maximal and submaximal efforts, consistency parameters are unlikely to reliably detect lack of effort in lumbar dynamometry.

Area of Science:

  • Biomechanics
  • Kinesiology
  • Rehabilitation Science

Background:

  • Assessing trunk performance consistency is crucial for detecting effort variations.
  • Submaximal efforts may exhibit different consistency patterns compared to maximal efforts.
  • Developing reliable methods to identify genuine effort is important in clinical and research settings.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To investigate differences in trunk performance consistency across maximum, preferred, and low effort levels.
  • To determine if consistency parameters can reliably detect submaximal effort during lumbar dynamometry.
  • To explore the impact of training on the consistency of low-effort trunk performances.

Main Methods:

  • Eleven healthy subjects performed lumbar dynamometry using the Isostation-B200.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Measurements included maximum, preferred, and low effort trunk performance.
  • Consistency was analyzed using coefficient of variations (CV), percentage differences, and onset slopes.

    • Main Results:

    • Maximum and preferred effort levels demonstrated comparable consistency.
    • Small significant differences in CV were observed between maximal and submaximal efforts for specific parameters.
    • No significant differences were found for percentage differences and onset slopes across effort levels.
    • Training did not enhance the consistency of low-effort measurements.

    Conclusions:

    • While minor CV differences exist between maximal and submaximal trunk efforts, they are unlikely to be sufficient for reliable effort discrimination.
    • Current consistency parameters in lumbar dynamometry may not be sensitive enough to detect a lack of effort.
    • Further research is needed to develop more robust methods for effort assessment in trunk performance testing.