Concurrent Validity of Field-Based Diagnostic Technology Monitoring Movement Velocity in Powerlifting Exercises

Area of Science:

• Sports Science
• Biomechanics
• Exercise Physiology

Background:

• Accurate measurement of movement velocity is crucial for monitoring training load and performance in resistance exercise.
• Various field-based technologies exist, but their concurrent validity in powerlifting exercises requires thorough investigation.

Purpose of the Study:

• To assess the concurrent validity of four different field-based technologies for measuring movement velocity during powerlifting exercises.
• To compare the accuracy of GymAware (GA), FitroDyne (FD), PUSH (PU), and Beast Sensor (BS) against a 3D motion capturing gold standard.

Main Methods:

• Twenty-four experienced powerlifters performed progressive loading tests in squat, bench press, and deadlift to 1 repetition maximum.
• Peak and mean movement velocities were recorded simultaneously using GA, FD, PU, and BS.
• A 3D motion capturing system served as the criterion measure for trajectory references.

Main Results:

• GymAware (GA) demonstrated the highest accuracy across all exercises (r = 0.99-1).
• PUSH (PU) showed reasonably to highly valid output across all exercises (r = 0.91-0.97).
• FitroDyne (FD) and Beast Sensor (BS) exhibited variable validity, with BS showing poor results in the deadlift and squat peak velocity.

Conclusions:

• Different movement velocity technologies are not interchangeable and possess varying levels of validity.
• Linear position transducers (like GA and PU) are recommended over inertial sensors (like BS) for precise velocity measurements in powerlifting.
• Practitioners should select technology based on the required level of measurement accuracy, favoring linear position transducers for negligible error.