Validity and Reliability of a Standardized Protocol for Assessing the One Repetition Maximum Performance During Overhead Pressing Exercises

• Marcos Antonio Soriano Rodríguez ^[1] ; Amador García Ramos ^[2] ; Antonio Torres González ^[3] ; Joaquin Castillo Palencia ^[4] ; Victor Ayuso ^[5] ; Pedro J. Marín ^[5] ; Paul Comfort ^[1]
  1. [1] University of Salford

     University of Salford

     Reino Unido

     
  2. [2] Department of Sports Sciences and Physical Conditioning, Faculty of Education, CIEDE, Catholic University of the Most Holy Conception, Concepcion, Chile
  3. [3] The House of Lifters National Weightlifting Club, Madrid, Spain
  4. [4] Force Athletes: Education and Physical Athlete Development Center, Albacete, Spain
  5. [5] CYMO Research Institute, Valladolid, Spain

  Mostrar afiliaciones +
• Localización: Journal of strength and conditioning research: the research journal of the NSCA, ISSN 1064-8011, Vol. 35, Nº. 11, 2021, págs. 2988-2992
• Idioma: inglés
• Texto completo no disponible (Saber más ...)
• Resumen

  • The aim of this study was to determine the validity of performing 3 one repetition maximum (1RM) assessments for the push press (PP), push jerk (PJ), and split jerk (SJ) in sequence in one testing session vs. the criterion method (testing on separate days), while determining the between-session reliability of the combined assessment. Twenty-two well-trained men (n = 22; age: 28.5 + 1.3 years; height: 1.80 + 0.04 m; body mass: 84.9 + 1.9 kg; training experience: 4.27 + 4.08 years) participated in this study. The 1RM was assessed in a sequential order in the same testing session (combined 1RM assessment) for the PP, PJ, and SJ on 2 occasions, to determine between-session reliability. The 1RM for each exercise was also examined on 3 separate sessions to compare the results against the combined method. A high reliability, low variability, and low measurement error were evident for the PP (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] = 0.960; coefficient of variation [CV] = 1.8%; smallest detectable difference [SDD] = 7.1%), PJ (ICC = 0.978; CV = 1.5%; SDD = 5.4%) and SJ (ICC = 0.987; CV = 0.8%; SDD = 4.6%). In addition, there were no significant (p > 0.05) or meaningful ([eta]2 <=0.001) differences between the single and combined assessments. The high reliability and validity of the combined assessment suggest that practitioners and researchers may simplify the testing procedure by assessing the 1RM during the 3 main overhead pressing exercises in a single testing session.