Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
J Sports Sci Med ; 8(1): 116-22, 2009.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24150564

RESUMO

This study compares the forward reach score, spine and pelvis postures, and hamstring criterion-related validity (concurrent validity) between the sit-and-reach test (SR) and the back-saver sit-and-reach test (BS). Seventy-six men (mean age ± SD: 23.45 ± 3.96 years) and 67 women (mean age ± SD: 23.85 ± 5.36 years) were asked to perform three trials of SR, BS left (BSl), right (BSr), and passive straight leg raise (PSLR) right and left (hamstring criterion measure) in a randomized order. The thoracic, lumbar, and pelvis angles (measured with a Uni-level inclinometer) and forward reach scores were recorded once the subjects reached forward as far as possible without flexing the knees. A repeated measure ANOVA was performed followed by Bonferroni's post hoc test. Pearson correlation coefficients were used to define the relationships between SR and BS scores with respect to PSLR. In both men and women, the thoracic angle in BS was significantly greater than in SR (p<0.016). However, no significant differences were found between the tests in lumbar angle, pelvic angle, and forward reach scores. The concurrent validity of the forward reach score as a measure of hamstring extensibility was moderate in women (0.66 0. 76) and weak to moderate in men (0.51 0.59). The concurrent validity was slightly higher in SR than in BS, although no significant differences between the correlation values were observed. There were significant differences in the thoracic angle between the SR and BS, but not in the forward reach score. There was no difference in concurrent validity between the two tests. However, the traditional SR was preferred because it reached better concurrent validity than the BS. Key pointsPrevious studies have analyzed the validity of sit-and-reach and back-saver sit-and-reach tests as criterion measures of hamstring muscle extensibility. The differences in the position of lower limbs between both the tests could influence the spinal and pelvic angles and forward reach score.Forward reach scores, lumbar and pelvic angles showed no significant differences between the tests, while lower thoracic angle was found in the sit-and-reach. However relatively large changes in thoracic angle were required to be confident true difference had occurred.The sit-and-reach test is the preferred test over the back-saver sit-and-reach as measure of hamstring muscle extensibility. The concurrent validity of sit-and-reach and back-saver sit-and-reach in men is compromised, and hence, other tests should be considered to evaluate the hamstring extensibility.

2.
J Sci Med Sport ; 10(6): 456-62, 2007 Dec.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-17298887

RESUMO

The purpose of the study was to compare the thoracic and lumbar spine posture among different sit-and-reach tests. Fifty-eight men and 47 women were asked to perform three trials of sit-and-reach test (SR), toe-touch test (TT), back-saver sit-and-reach test (BS) right and left, unilateral seated sit-and-reach test (USR) right and left, and V sit-and-reach test (VSR). Thoracic and lumbar angles were assessed with an inclinometer when subjects reached forward maximally. Women had a lower thoracic angle than men on all tests (p<0.05). No differences were found in the lumbar angle between genders. The thoracic angle was the highest in VSR (75.3 degrees in men and 65.8 degrees in women) and the lowest in TT (61.7 degrees in men and 53.1 degrees in women). No differences were found among some pairwise comparisons (SR-BS in both genders, SR-TT, SR-VSR and others in women). The VSR test presented the highest values in lumbar spine when compared to other tests (30.5 degrees in men and 32.0 degrees in women). Unilateral seated sit-and-reach test presented the lowest lumbar angle in men (24.2 degrees for right leg and 23.9 degrees for left leg) and women (23.9 degrees in both legs) and there were significant differences with respect to the other tests. Characteristics and administration procedures of tests, such us uni- or bilateral, sitting or standing, measuring with or without box, parallel or V position, and hip position influence thoracic and lumbar postures.


Assuntos
Teste de Esforço/métodos , Postura , Coluna Vertebral/fisiologia , Adulto , Análise de Variância , Teste de Esforço/instrumentação , Feminino , Humanos , Vértebras Lombares/fisiologia , Masculino , Aptidão Física/fisiologia , Caracteres Sexuais , Vértebras Torácicas/fisiologia
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...