Validity and Reliability of a Standardized Protocol for Assessing the One Repetition Maximum Performance During Overhead Pressing Exercises.

Clicks: 180
ID: 86147
2020
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Steady

Ranked #26 of 27 articles by views in journal of strength and conditioning research

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Soriano, MA, García-Ramos, A, Torres-González, A, Castillo-Palencia, J, Ayuso, V, Marín, PJ, and Comfort, P. Validity and reliability of a standardized protocol for assessing the one repetition maximum performance during overhead pressing exercises. J Strength Cond Res XX(X): 000-000, 2020-The aim of this study was to determine the validity of performing 3 one repetition maximum (1RM) assessments for the push press (PP), push jerk (PJ), and split jerk (SJ) in sequence in one testing session vs. the criterion method (testing on separate days), while determining the between-session reliability of the combined assessment. Twenty-two well-trained men (n = 22; age: 28.5 + 1.3 years; height: 1.80 + 0.04 m; body mass: 84.9 + 1.9 kg; training experience: 4.27 + 4.08 years) participated in this study. The 1RM was assessed in a sequential order in the same testing session (combined 1RM assessment) for the PP, PJ, and SJ on 2 occasions, to determine between-session reliability. The 1RM for each exercise was also examined on 3 separate sessions to compare the results against the combined method. A high reliability, low variability, and low measurement error were evident for the PP (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] = 0.960; coefficient of variation [CV] = 1.8%; smallest detectable difference [SDD] = 7.1%), PJ (ICC = 0.978; CV = 1.5%; SDD = 5.4%) and SJ (ICC = 0.987; CV = 0.8%; SDD = 4.6%). In addition, there were no significant (p > 0.05) or meaningful (η ≤0.001) differences between the single and combined assessments. The high reliability and validity of the combined assessment suggest that practitioners and researchers may simplify the testing procedure by assessing the 1RM during the 3 main overhead pressing exercises in a single testing session.
Reference Key
soriano2020validityjournal Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Soriano, Marcos A;García-Ramos, Amador;Torres-González, Antonio;Castillo-Palencia, Joaquín;Ayuso, Víctor;Marín, Pedro J;Comfort, Paul;
Journal journal of strength and conditioning research
Year 2020
DOI
10.1519/JSC.0000000000003284
URL
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.