| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
- Beato, Marco, et al.
(author)
-
Current Guidelines for the Implementation of Flywheel Resistance Training Technology in Sports: A Consensus Statement
- 2024
-
In: Sports Medicine. - : ADIS INT LTD. - 0112-1642 .- 1179-2035.
-
Research review (peer-reviewed)abstract
- BackgroundFlywheel resistance training has become more integrated within resistance training programs in a variety of sports due to the neuromuscular, strength, and task-specific enhancements reported with this training.ObjectiveThis paper aimed to present the consensus reached by internationally recognized experts during a meeting on current definitions and guidelines for the implementation of flywheel resistance training technology in sports.MethodsNineteen experts from different countries took part in the consensus process; 16 of them were present at the consensus meeting (18 May 2023) while three submitted their recommendations by e-mail. Prior to the meeting, evidence summaries were developed relating to areas of priority. This paper discusses the available evidence and consensus process from which recommendations were made regarding the appropriate use of flywheel resistance training technology in sports. The process to gain consensus had five steps: (1) performing a systematic review of systematic reviews, (2) updating the most recent umbrella review published on this topic, (3) first round discussion among a sample of the research group included in this consensus statement, (4) selection of research group members-process of the consensus meeting and formulation of the recommendations, and (5) the consensus process. The systematic analysis of the literature was performed to select the most up-to-date review papers available on the topic, which resulted in nine articles; their methodological quality was assessed according to AMSTAR 2 (Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Review 2) and GRADE (Grading Recommendations Assessment Development and Evaluation). Statements and recommendations scoring 7-9 were considered appropriate.ResultsThe recommendations were based on the evidence summary and researchers' expertise; the consensus statement included three statements and seven recommendations for the use of flywheel resistance training technology. These statements and recommendations were anonymously voted on and qualitatively analyzed. The three statements reported a score ranging from 8.1 to 8.8, and therefore, all statements included in this consensus were considered appropriate. The recommendations (1-7) had a score ranging from 7.7 to 8.6, and therefore, all recommendations were considered appropriate.ConclusionsBecause of the consensus achieved among the experts in this project, it is suggested that practitioners and researchers should adopt the guidelines reported in this consensus statement regarding the use of flywheel resistance technology in sports.
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
- Jönsson, Maria, et al.
(author)
-
Foot centre of pressure and ground reaction force during quadriceps resistance exercises; a comparison between force plates and a pressure insole system.
- 2019
-
In: Journal of Biomechanics. - : Elsevier BV. - 0021-9290 .- 1873-2380. ; 87, s. 206-210
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- The study compared the centre of pressure measurements (COP) and vertical ground reaction forces (vGRF) from a pressure insole system to that from force plates (FP) during two flywheel quadriceps resistance exercises: leg press and squat. The comparison was performed using a motion capture system and simultaneous measurements of COP and vGRF from FP and insoles. At lower insole-vGRF (<250 N/insole) COP accuracy deteriorated and those data were excluded from further analysis. The insoles systematically displaced the COP slightly posteriorly and medially compared to the FP measurements. Pearson's coefficient of correlation (r) between insole- and FP-COP showed good agreement in both the anteroposterior (squat: r = 0.96, leg press: r = 0.97) and mediolateral direction (squat: r = 0.84, leg press: r = 0.90), whereas the root-mean-square errors (RMSE) were lower in the mediolateral (squat: 3.9 mm, leg press: 4.5 mm) than the anteroposterior (squat and leg press: 11.8 mm) direction. Vertical GRF was slightly overestimated by the insoles in leg press and RMSE were greater in leg press (8% of peak force) than in squat (6%). Overall, results were within the range of previous studies performed on gait. The strong agreement between insole and FP measurements indicates that insoles may replace FPs in field applications and biomechanical computations during resistance exercise, provided that the applied force is sufficient.
|
|
| 10. |
|
|
