Reliability and validity of depth camera 3D scanning to determine thigh volume.

Gross thigh volume is a key anthropometric variable to predict sport performance and health. Currently, it is either estimated by using the frustum method, which is prone to high inter-and intra-observer error, or using medical imaging, which is expensive and time consuming. Depth camera 3D-imaging systems offer a cheap alternative to measure thigh volume but no between-session reliability or comparison to medical imaging has been made. This experiment established between-session reliability and examined agreement with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Forty-eight male cyclists had their thigh volume measured by the depth camera system on two occasions to establish between-session reliability. A subset of 32 participants also had lower body MRIs, through which agreement between the depth camera system and MRI was established. The results showed low between-session variability (CV = 1.7%; Absolute Typical Error = 112 cm3) when measuring thigh volume using the depth camera system. The depth camera systematically measured gross thigh volume 32.6cm3 lower than MRI. These results suggest that depth camera 3D-imaging systems are reliable tools for measuring thigh volume and show good agreement with MRI scanners, providing a cheap and time-saving alternative to medical imaging analysis.

Joint-specific power production during submaximal and maximal cycling.

UNLABELLED: Separate authors have reported that knee extension dominates power production during submaximal cycling (SUB(cyc)) and hip extension is the dominant action during maximal cycling (MAX(cyc)). Changes in joint-specific powers across broad ranges of net cycling powers (P(net)) within one group of cyclists have not been reported. PURPOSE: Our purpose was to determine the extent to which ankle, knee, and hip joint actions produced power across a range of P(net) . We hypothesized that relative knee extension power would decrease and relative knee flexion and hip extension powers would increase as P(net) increased. METHODS: Eleven cyclists performed SUB(cyc) (250, 400, 550, 700, and 850 W) and MAX(cyc) trials at 90 rpm. Joint-specific powers were calculated and averaged over complete pedal revolutions and over extension and flexion phases. Portions of the cycle spent in extension (duty cycle) were determined for the whole leg and ankle, knee, and hip joints. Relationships of relative joint-specific powers with P(net) were assessed with linear regression analyses. RESULTS: Absolute ankle, knee, and hip joint-specific powers increased as P(net) increased. Relative knee extension power decreased (r(2) = 0.88, P = 0.01) and knee flexion power increased (r(2) = 0.98, P < 0.001) as P(net) increased. Relative hip extension power was constant across all P(net) . Whole-leg and ankle, knee, and hip joint duty cycle values were greater for MAX(cyc) than for SUB(cyc). CONCLUSIONS: Our data demonstrate that 1) absolute ankle, knee, and hip joint-specific powers substantially increase as a function of increased P(net) , 2) hip extension was the dominant power-producing action during SUB(cyc) and MAX(cyc), 3) knee flexion power becomes relatively more important during high-intensity cycling, and 4) increased duty cycle values represent an important strategy to increase maximum power.

Effect of crank length on joint-specific power during maximal cycling.

UNLABELLED: Previous investigators have suggested that crank length has little effect on overall short-term maximal cycling power once the effects of pedal speed and pedaling rate are accounted for. Although overall maximal power may be unaffected by crank length, it is possible that similar overall power might be produced with different combinations of joint-specific powers. Knowing the effects of crank length on joint-specific power production during maximal cycling may have practical implications with respect to avoiding or delaying fatigue during high-intensity exercise. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of changes in crank length on joint-specific powers during short-term maximal cycling. METHODS: Fifteen trained cyclists performed maximal isokinetic cycling trials using crank lengths of 150, 165, 170, 175, and 190 mm. At each crank length, participants performed maximal trials at pedaling rates optimized for maximum power and at a constant pedaling rate of 120 rpm. Using pedal forces and limb kinematics, joint-specific powers were calculated via inverse dynamics and normalized to overall pedal power. RESULTS: ANOVAs revealed that crank length had no significant effect on relative joint-specific powers at the hip, knee, or ankle joints (P > 0.05) when pedaling rate was optimized. When pedaling rate was constant, crank length had a small but significant effect on hip and knee joint power (150 vs 190 mm only) (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: These data demonstrate that crank length does not affect relative joint-specific power once the effects of pedaling rate and pedal speed are accounted for. Our results thereby substantiate previous findings that crank length per se is not an important determinant of maximum cycling power production.