A comparison of absolute, ratio standard and allometric approaches for bench press performance assessment in men over 60

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Weiss Freccia, Guilherme
Data de Publicação: 2023
Outros Autores: Kulkamp, Wladymir, Júnior, Jairo, Muller, Joana, Santos, Kleber, Carminatti, Lorival
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Revista da Educação física/UEM (Online)
Texto Completo: https://periodicos.uem.br/ojs/index.php/RevEducFis/article/view/65710
Resumo: Body mass is known to affect muscle strength and the outcome of some functional tests, so that heavier and taller people will be stronger than lighter and smaller ones. Ratio standard (RS) has been widely used to remove the body mass effect, despite long date criticism due to its inadequacy. Allometry (ALLO), in turn, has been applied as an efficient method for normalizing muscular strength. As the bench press (BP) is a well-recognized strength and conditioning exercise for older adults, the aim of the present study was to verify the influence of body mass on the performance assessment of a group of older men in the BP, by comparing the absolute, RS and ALLO approaches. Sixteen healthy old men (65.5±5.13 years old; 75.42±9.78Kg; 1.73±5.98m; 25.11±2.71 kg/m2; 24.76±4.10 %fat) volunteered to participate in the study. Maximum dynamic load was verified by individual one-repetition maximum (1-RM) tests. Comparisons of means revealed that significant 1-RM difference between lighter (54.9±8.85Kg) and heavier (66.2±8.86Kg) participants was identified only in absolute approach (p<0.05; ES=0.57). RS failed in completely remove the body mass effect, allowing correlation between normalized muscular strength and BM (r=0.23), in contraire of ALLO (r=0.03 and 0.06). Kendall's concordance coefficient revealed an absolute lack of agreement between approaches when compared their respective ordinal classifications (kw=0.003; p>0.05). In line with previous research, ALLO has shown to be the only suitable method to remove adequately the body mass effect and to provide appropriated performance scores for the older men evaluated in this study.
id UEM-4_30a0e204045d14d4450b654493229ff0
oai_identifier_str oai:periodicos.uem.br/ojs:article/65710
network_acronym_str UEM-4
network_name_str Revista da Educação física/UEM (Online)
repository_id_str
spelling A comparison of absolute, ratio standard and allometric approaches for bench press performance assessment in men over 60Comparação das abordagens absoluta, razão padrão e alométrica para a performance no supino em homens acima de 60 anosAllometryRatio StandardScalingMuscle StrengthBench PressAlometriaRazão-padrãoEscalonamentoForça muscularSupinoBody mass is known to affect muscle strength and the outcome of some functional tests, so that heavier and taller people will be stronger than lighter and smaller ones. Ratio standard (RS) has been widely used to remove the body mass effect, despite long date criticism due to its inadequacy. Allometry (ALLO), in turn, has been applied as an efficient method for normalizing muscular strength. As the bench press (BP) is a well-recognized strength and conditioning exercise for older adults, the aim of the present study was to verify the influence of body mass on the performance assessment of a group of older men in the BP, by comparing the absolute, RS and ALLO approaches. Sixteen healthy old men (65.5±5.13 years old; 75.42±9.78Kg; 1.73±5.98m; 25.11±2.71 kg/m2; 24.76±4.10 %fat) volunteered to participate in the study. Maximum dynamic load was verified by individual one-repetition maximum (1-RM) tests. Comparisons of means revealed that significant 1-RM difference between lighter (54.9±8.85Kg) and heavier (66.2±8.86Kg) participants was identified only in absolute approach (p<0.05; ES=0.57). RS failed in completely remove the body mass effect, allowing correlation between normalized muscular strength and BM (r=0.23), in contraire of ALLO (r=0.03 and 0.06). Kendall's concordance coefficient revealed an absolute lack of agreement between approaches when compared their respective ordinal classifications (kw=0.003; p>0.05). In line with previous research, ALLO has shown to be the only suitable method to remove adequately the body mass effect and to provide appropriated performance scores for the older men evaluated in this study.Sabe-se que a massa corporal afeta a força muscular e o resultado de alguns testes funcionais, de modo que pessoas mais pesadas e altas serão mais fortes que as mais leves e menores. A razão-padrão (RP) tem sido largamente utilizada para remover o efeito da massa corporal, apesar de críticas conhecidas há muito tempo devido sua inadequação. Alometria (ALO), do contrário, tem sido aplicada como um método eficiente para normalizar a força muscular. Como o supino é um exercício de força e condicionamento bem reconhecido para idosos, o objetivo deste estudo foi verificar a influência da massa corporal sobre a avaliação do desempenho de um grupo de idosos no supino, comparando as abordagens absoluta (AB), RP e ALO. Dezesseis idosos saudáveis (65,5±5,13 anos de idade; 75,42±9,78Kg; 1,73±5,98m; 25,11±2,71 kg/m2; 24,76±4,10 %gordura) se voluntariaram para participar no estudo. A máxima carga dinâmica foi verificada pelos testes de 1 repetição máxima (1RM). Na comparação das médias, a diferença significante do 1RM entre os participantes leves (54,9±8,85Kg) e pesados (66,2±8,86Kg) foi identificada apenas na abordagem ABS (p<0,05; ES=0,57). A RP falhou em remover completamente o efeito da massa corporal, permitindo correlação entre a força muscular e a massa corporal normalizadas (r=0,23), ao contrário da ALO (r=0,23 e 0,06). O coeficiente de Kendall revelou ausência de concordância entre as abordagens quando comparadas as suas respectivas classificações ordinais (kw=0,003; p>0,05). Em linha com pesquisas anteriores, ALO tem se mostrado como o único método viável para remover adequadamente o efeito da MC e para oferecer escores de desempenho mais apropriados para homens idosos, como os avaliados por este estudo.Department of Physical Education - State University of Maringá (UEM), Maringá-PR, Brazil2023-06-07info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://periodicos.uem.br/ojs/index.php/RevEducFis/article/view/6571010.4025/jphyseduc.v34i1.3424Journal of Physical Education; Vol 34 No 1 (2023): Journal of Physical Education; e-3424Journal of Physical Education; Vol. 34 Núm. 1 (2023): Journal of Physical Education; e-3424Journal of Physical Education; v. 34 n. 1 (2023): Journal of Physical Education; e-34242448-2455reponame:Revista da Educação física/UEM (Online)instname:Universidade Estadual de Maringá (UEM)instacron:UEMenghttps://periodicos.uem.br/ojs/index.php/RevEducFis/article/view/65710/751375156025Copyright (c) 2023 Kulkamp et al.https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessWeiss Freccia, GuilhermeKulkamp, WladymirJúnior, JairoMuller, Joana Santos, KleberCarminatti, Lorival2023-08-04T19:18:05Zoai:periodicos.uem.br/ojs:article/65710Revistahttps://periodicos.uem.br/ojs/index.php/RevEducFis/PUBhttps://periodicos.uem.br/ojs/index.php/RevEducFis/oai||revdef@uem.br1983-30830103-3948opendoar:2023-08-04T19:18:05Revista da Educação física/UEM (Online) - Universidade Estadual de Maringá (UEM)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv A comparison of absolute, ratio standard and allometric approaches for bench press performance assessment in men over 60
Comparação das abordagens absoluta, razão padrão e alométrica para a performance no supino em homens acima de 60 anos
title A comparison of absolute, ratio standard and allometric approaches for bench press performance assessment in men over 60
spellingShingle A comparison of absolute, ratio standard and allometric approaches for bench press performance assessment in men over 60
Weiss Freccia, Guilherme
Allometry
Ratio Standard
Scaling
Muscle Strength
Bench Press
Alometria
Razão-padrão
Escalonamento
Força muscular
Supino
title_short A comparison of absolute, ratio standard and allometric approaches for bench press performance assessment in men over 60
title_full A comparison of absolute, ratio standard and allometric approaches for bench press performance assessment in men over 60
title_fullStr A comparison of absolute, ratio standard and allometric approaches for bench press performance assessment in men over 60
title_full_unstemmed A comparison of absolute, ratio standard and allometric approaches for bench press performance assessment in men over 60
title_sort A comparison of absolute, ratio standard and allometric approaches for bench press performance assessment in men over 60
author Weiss Freccia, Guilherme
author_facet Weiss Freccia, Guilherme
Kulkamp, Wladymir
Júnior, Jairo
Muller, Joana
Santos, Kleber
Carminatti, Lorival
author_role author
author2 Kulkamp, Wladymir
Júnior, Jairo
Muller, Joana
Santos, Kleber
Carminatti, Lorival
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Weiss Freccia, Guilherme
Kulkamp, Wladymir
Júnior, Jairo
Muller, Joana
Santos, Kleber
Carminatti, Lorival
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Allometry
Ratio Standard
Scaling
Muscle Strength
Bench Press
Alometria
Razão-padrão
Escalonamento
Força muscular
Supino
topic Allometry
Ratio Standard
Scaling
Muscle Strength
Bench Press
Alometria
Razão-padrão
Escalonamento
Força muscular
Supino
description Body mass is known to affect muscle strength and the outcome of some functional tests, so that heavier and taller people will be stronger than lighter and smaller ones. Ratio standard (RS) has been widely used to remove the body mass effect, despite long date criticism due to its inadequacy. Allometry (ALLO), in turn, has been applied as an efficient method for normalizing muscular strength. As the bench press (BP) is a well-recognized strength and conditioning exercise for older adults, the aim of the present study was to verify the influence of body mass on the performance assessment of a group of older men in the BP, by comparing the absolute, RS and ALLO approaches. Sixteen healthy old men (65.5±5.13 years old; 75.42±9.78Kg; 1.73±5.98m; 25.11±2.71 kg/m2; 24.76±4.10 %fat) volunteered to participate in the study. Maximum dynamic load was verified by individual one-repetition maximum (1-RM) tests. Comparisons of means revealed that significant 1-RM difference between lighter (54.9±8.85Kg) and heavier (66.2±8.86Kg) participants was identified only in absolute approach (p<0.05; ES=0.57). RS failed in completely remove the body mass effect, allowing correlation between normalized muscular strength and BM (r=0.23), in contraire of ALLO (r=0.03 and 0.06). Kendall's concordance coefficient revealed an absolute lack of agreement between approaches when compared their respective ordinal classifications (kw=0.003; p>0.05). In line with previous research, ALLO has shown to be the only suitable method to remove adequately the body mass effect and to provide appropriated performance scores for the older men evaluated in this study.
publishDate 2023
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2023-06-07
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://periodicos.uem.br/ojs/index.php/RevEducFis/article/view/65710
10.4025/jphyseduc.v34i1.3424
url https://periodicos.uem.br/ojs/index.php/RevEducFis/article/view/65710
identifier_str_mv 10.4025/jphyseduc.v34i1.3424
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://periodicos.uem.br/ojs/index.php/RevEducFis/article/view/65710/751375156025
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv Copyright (c) 2023 Kulkamp et al.
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv Copyright (c) 2023 Kulkamp et al.
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Department of Physical Education - State University of Maringá (UEM), Maringá-PR, Brazil
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Department of Physical Education - State University of Maringá (UEM), Maringá-PR, Brazil
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Journal of Physical Education; Vol 34 No 1 (2023): Journal of Physical Education; e-3424
Journal of Physical Education; Vol. 34 Núm. 1 (2023): Journal of Physical Education; e-3424
Journal of Physical Education; v. 34 n. 1 (2023): Journal of Physical Education; e-3424
2448-2455
reponame:Revista da Educação física/UEM (Online)
instname:Universidade Estadual de Maringá (UEM)
instacron:UEM
instname_str Universidade Estadual de Maringá (UEM)
instacron_str UEM
institution UEM
reponame_str Revista da Educação física/UEM (Online)
collection Revista da Educação física/UEM (Online)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Revista da Educação física/UEM (Online) - Universidade Estadual de Maringá (UEM)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv ||revdef@uem.br
_version_ 1799317484988268544