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
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.
