Authors

  • Kelly Sheerin
    Sports Performance Research lnstitute New Zealand, Auckland University of  Technology, New Zealand
  • Thor Besier
    Sports Performance Research lnstitute New Zealand, Auckland University of  Technology, New Zealand
    Auckland Bioengineering Institute & Dept of Engineering Science, University of Auckland, New Zealand
  • Duncan Reid
    Sports Performance Research lnstitute New Zealand, Auckland University of  Technology, New Zealand
  • Patria Hume
    Sports Performance Research lnstitute New Zealand, Auckland University of  Technology, New Zealand

Get this research in PDF format

Download Now

Abstract

Axial and resultant peak tibial acceleration might be useful for screeninglmonitoring runners at risk of lower limb injury. This study quantified between-session reliability and variability of axial and resultant peak tibial acceleration during running. Fourteen runners completed four running speeds at two testing sessions seven days apart with triaxial wireless accelerometers attached to the tibia. Average mean differences between sessions across all four speeds (for the right or left side) were 4.5-5.7% (ES 0.01-0.17; ICC 0.73-0.95; CV% 7.5-1 7.9) for axial and 0.9-5.1 % (ES 0.01 -0.1 2; ICC 0.84-0.97; CV% 5.913.9)) for resultant peak tibial acceleration. While both axial and resultant peak tibial acceleration are reliable and therefore appropriate for monitoring and assessment of an intervention, resultant peak tibial acceleration should be preferentially used.

x

Sign up for our newsletter

Recive IMeasureU insights direct to your inbox
Subscribe now