PMID- 29385000
OWN - NLM
STAT- MEDLINE
DCOM- 20180827
LR  - 20181202
IS  - 1533-4287 (Electronic)
IS  - 1064-8011 (Linking)
VI  - 32
IP  - 4
DP  - 2018 Apr
TI  - Effect of Low-Pass Filtering on Isometric Midthigh Pull Kinetics.
PG  - 983-989
LID - 10.1519/JSC.0000000000002473 [doi]
AB  - Dos'Santos, T, Lake, J, Jones, PA, and Comfort, P. Effect of low-pass filtering 
      on isometric midthigh pull kinetics. J Strength Cond Res 32(4): 983-989, 2018-The 
      purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of low-pass filtering on 
      isometric midthigh pull (IMTP) kinetics, including body weight (BW), onset 
      threshold force, time-specific force values (50, 100, 150, and 200 ms), and peak 
      force (PF). Forty IMTP trials from 24 collegiate athletes (age: 21.2 +/- 1.8 years, 
      height: 1.72 +/- 0.09 m, mass: 79.4 +/- 8.2 kg) were analyzed and compared using 
      unfiltered (UF) and low-pass filtered (LPF) (fourth-order Butterworth) with 
      cutoff frequencies of 10 (LPF10) and 100 (LPF100) Hz. Significantly lower (p < 
      0.001, g = -0.43 to -0.99) onset threshold forces were produced when force data 
      were LPF. This led to significant (p < 0.001, g = 0.05-0.21) underestimations of 
      time-specific force values when LPF10 compared with UF, displaying unacceptable 
      percentage differences (1.2-3.3%) and unacceptable limits of agreement (LOA) 
      (-25.4 to 100.3 N). Although significantly different (p </= 0.049), trivial (g </= 
      0.04) and acceptable percentage differences (</=0.8%) and acceptable LOA (-28.0 to 
      46.2 N) in time-specific force values were observed between UF and LPF100. 
      Statistically significant (p < 0.001), yet trivial (g </= 0.03), and acceptable 
      percentage differences (</=0.7%) and acceptable LOA (-4.7 to 33.9 N) were 
      demonstrated in PF between filtering conditions. No significant differences (p = 
      1.000) and identical BW values were observed between filtering conditions. 
      Low-pass filtering results in underestimations in IMTP kinetics; however, these 
      differences are acceptable between LPF100 and UF but unacceptable between LPF10 
      and UF (excluding PF). Filtering procedures should be standardized when 
      longitudinally monitoring changes in IMTP force-time characteristics to allow 
      valid comparisons, with analysis of UF data recommended.
FAU - Dos'Santos, Thomas
AU  - Dos'Santos T
AD  - Human Performance Laboratory, Directorate of Sport, Exercise, and Physiotherapy, 
      University of Salford, Greater Manchester, United Kingdom.
FAU - Lake, Jason
AU  - Lake J
AD  - Department of Sport and Exercise Sciences, University of Chichester, Chichester, 
      United Kingdom.
FAU - Jones, Paul A
AU  - Jones PA
AD  - Human Performance Laboratory, Directorate of Sport, Exercise, and Physiotherapy, 
      University of Salford, Greater Manchester, United Kingdom.
FAU - Comfort, Paul
AU  - Comfort P
AD  - Human Performance Laboratory, Directorate of Sport, Exercise, and Physiotherapy, 
      University of Salford, Greater Manchester, United Kingdom.
LA  - eng
PT  - Journal Article
PL  - United States
TA  - J Strength Cond Res
JT  - Journal of strength and conditioning research
JID - 9415084
SB  - IM
MH  - Adolescent
MH  - Athletes
MH  - Body Weight
MH  - Humans
MH  - Isometric Contraction/*physiology
MH  - Lower Extremity/*physiology
MH  - Male
MH  - Muscle Strength/*physiology
MH  - Muscle, Skeletal/*physiology
MH  - Retrospective Studies
MH  - Young Adult
EDAT- 2018/02/01 06:00
MHDA- 2018/08/28 06:00
CRDT- 2018/02/01 06:00
PHST- 2018/02/01 06:00 [pubmed]
PHST- 2018/08/28 06:00 [medline]
PHST- 2018/02/01 06:00 [entrez]
AID - 10.1519/JSC.0000000000002473 [doi]
PST - ppublish
SO  - J Strength Cond Res. 2018 Apr;32(4):983-989. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000002473.