Can isometric testing substitute for the one repetition maximum squat test?

When measuring maximum strength, a high accuracy and precision is required to monitor the training adaptations. Based on available reliability parameters, the literature suggests the replacement of the one repetition maximum (1RM) by isometric testing to save testing time. However, from a statistical point of view, correlation coefficients do not provide the required information when aiming to replace one test by another. Therefore, the literature suggests the inclusion of the mean absolute error (MAE), the mean absolute percentage error (MAPE) for agreement analysis. Consequently, to check the replaceability of 1RM testing methods, the current study examined the agreement of isometric and dynamic testing methods in the squat and the isometric mid-thigh pull. While in accordance with the literature, correlations were classified high r = 0.638-0.828 and ICC = 0.630-0.828, the agreement analysis provided MAEs of 175.75-444.17 N and MAPEs of 16.16-57.71% indicating an intolerable high measurement error between isometric and dynamic testing conditions in the squat and isometric mid-thigh pull. In contrast to previous studies, using MAE, MAPE supplemented by CCC and BA analysis highlights the poor agreement between the included strength tests. The recommendation to replace 1RM testing with isometric testing routines in the squat does not provide suitable concordance and is not recommended.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
European Journal of Applied Physiology
Published
2024-08-05
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00421-024-05554-8
Citations
3
Primary Topic
Sports Performance and Training
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.43

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Can isometric testing substitute for the one repetition maximum squat test?

Klaus Wirth, Martin Hillebrecht, Sebastian Wallot, Konstantin Warneke et al.
3 citations
European Journal of Applied Physiology
Sports Performance and Training
1.43
article

Can isometric testing substitute for the one repetition maximum squat test?

Klaus Wirth, Martin Hillebrecht, Sebastian Wallot, Konstantin Warneke, Michael Keiner, David George Behm, Andreas Konrad, Martin Kaufmann, Mareike Sproll
article en
3 citations

Abstract

When measuring maximum strength, a high accuracy and precision is required to monitor the training adaptations. Based on available reliability parameters, the literature suggests the replacement of the one repetition maximum (1RM) by isometric testing to save testing time. However, from a statistical point of view, correlation coefficients do not provide the required information when aiming to replace one test by another. Therefore, the literature suggests the inclusion of the mean absolute error (MAE), the mean absolute percentage error (MAPE) for agreement analysis. Consequently, to check the replaceability of 1RM testing methods, the current study examined the agreement of isometric and dynamic testing methods in the squat and the isometric mid-thigh pull. While in accordance with the literature, correlations were classified high r = 0.638-0.828 and ICC = 0.630-0.828, the agreement analysis provided MAEs of 175.75-444.17 N and MAPEs of 16.16-57.71% indicating an intolerable high measurement error between isometric and dynamic testing conditions in the squat and isometric mid-thigh pull. In contrast to previous studies, using MAE, MAPE supplemented by CCC and BA analysis highlights the poor agreement between the included strength tests. The recommendation to replace 1RM testing with isometric testing routines in the squat does not provide suitable concordance and is not recommended.

European Journal of Applied PhysiologyVol. 124(12)
Leuphana University of Lüneburg (DE), Carl von Ossietzky Universität Oldenburg (DE), Memorial University of Newfoundland (CA), German Sport University Cologne (DE), University of Graz (AT), Fachhochschule Wiener Neustadt (AT), Graz University of Technology (AT), Friedrich Schiller University Jena (DE)
Austrian Science Fund, Karl-Franzens-Universität Graz
No poverty
Openalex Percentile: Top 21%
Sports Performance and Training
1.43
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.