Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/11000/40470
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorMartín Rivera, Fernando-
dc.contributor.authorRodrigo Mallorca, Darío-
dc.contributor.authorFranco Grau, Luis María-
dc.contributor.authorVidal Vidal, Jose Vicente Cayetano-
dc.contributor.authorSáez Berlanga, Ángel-
dc.contributor.authorChulvi Medrano, Iván-
dc.contributor.otherDepartamentos de la UMH::Ciencias del Deportees_ES
dc.date.accessioned2026-09-07T13:38:20Z-
dc.date.available2026-09-07T13:38:20Z-
dc.date.created2025-
dc.identifier.citationMetrology 5.3 (2025): 49es_ES
dc.identifier.issn2673-8244-
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11000/40470-
dc.description.abstractAbstract Background: Velocity-based training (VBT) requires precise measurement devices to monitor neuromuscular performance. PowerTrackTM is a novel optoelectronic device designed to assess movement velocity in resistance training. This study aimed to evaluate the validity and reliability of PowerTrackTM during the Smith machine back squat. Methods: Twenty experienced-trained men performed three repetitions at three submaximal loads (20, 50, and 70 kg) across two sessions. Velocity metrics—mean velocity (MV), mean propulsive velocity (MPV), and maximum velocity (Vmax)—were simultaneously recorded by PowerTrackTM and the criterion device (MuscleLabTM). Validity was assessed via ordinary least products (OLP) regression, Lin’s concordance correlation coefficient (CCC), and Bland–Altman plots. Reliability was determined using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs), standard error of measurement (SEM), coefficient of variation (CV), and minimum detectable change (MDC). Results: PowerTrack showed high agreement with MuscleLabTM for MPV and Vmax (slope ≈ 1.00; CCC = 0.95–0.97), while MV presented a proportional bias (slope = 0.83). ICCs ranged from 0.78 to 0.91 across loads, and SEM remained <0.09 m/s for all metrics, indicating excellent relative reliability and acceptable absolute precision. Conclusion: Despite a slight underestimation of MV at light loads, PowerTrackTM proved to be a valid and reliable device for velocity monitoring in VBT contexts.es_ES
dc.formatapplication/pdfes_ES
dc.format.extent12es_ES
dc.language.isoenges_ES
dc.publisherMDPIes_ES
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesses_ES
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/*
dc.subjectvelocity monitoringes_ES
dc.subjectforce–velocity profilinges_ES
dc.subjectoptoelectronic technologyes_ES
dc.subjectencoderes_ES
dc.subjectconcurrent validityes_ES
dc.subjectreliabilityes_ES
dc.subject.otherCDU::7 - Bellas artes::79 - Diversiones. Espectáculos. Cine. Teatro. Danza. Juegos.Deporteses_ES
dc.subject.otherCDU::6 - Ciencias aplicadas::62 - Ingeniería. Tecnología::621 - Ingeniería mecánica en general. Tecnología nuclear. Electrotecnia. Maquinaria::621.3 - Ingeniería eléctrica. Electrotecnia. Telecomunicacioneses_ES
dc.subject.otherCDU::6 - Ciencias aplicadas::61 - Medicina::612 - Fisiologíaes_ES
dc.titleEvaluating a New Optical Device for Velocity-Based Training: Validity and Reliability of the PowerTrackTM Sensores_ES
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/articlees_ES
dc.relation.publisherversionhttps://doi.org/10.3390/metrology5030049es_ES
Appears in Collections:
Artículos Ciencias del Deporte


thumbnail_pdf
View/Open:
 metrology-05-00049-v2-2.pdf

2,84 MB
Adobe PDF
Share:


Creative Commons ???jsp.display-item.text9???