Assessment of Ground Contact Time in the Field: Evaluation of Validity and Reliability

Author:

Weber Jason A.1ORCID,Hart Nicolas H.23456,Rantalainen Timo267,Connick Mark8,Newton Robert U.29

Affiliation:

1. UWA Tech and Policy Lab, University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia;

2. Exercise Medicine Research Institute, Edith Cowan University, Perth, Australia;

3. Human Performance Research Centre, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, Australia;

4. Caring Futures Institute, College of Nursing and Health Sciences, Flinders University, Adelaide, Australia;

5. Centre for Healthcare Translation, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia;

6. Institute for Health Research, The University of Notre Dame Australia, Perth, Australia;

7. Gerontology Research Centre & Faculty of Sport and Health Sciences, University of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä, Finland;

8. School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia; and

9. School of Human Movement and Nutrition Sciences, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia

Abstract

Abstract Weber, JA, Hart, NH, Rantalainen, T, Connick, M, and Newton, RU. Assessment of ground contact time in the field: evaluation of validity and reliability. J Strength Cond Res 38(1): e34–e39, 2024—The capacity to measure the kinetic and kinematic components of running has been extensively investigated in laboratory settings. Many authors have produced work that is of high value to practitioners within sporting environments; however, the lack of field-based technology to assess features of running gait validly and reliably has prevented the application of these valuable works. This paper examines the validity and reliability of a practical field-based methodology for using commercial inertial measurement units (IMUs) to assess ground contact time (GCT). Validity was examined in the comparison of GCT measured from ground reaction force by a force plate and that determined by a lumbar mounted commercial IMU and analyzed using a commercially available system (SPEEDSIG). Reliability was assessed by a field-based examination of within and between-session variability in GCT measured using a commercially available system (SPEEDSIG). Significance was set at p ≤ 0.05. Results for validity (intraclass correlation [ICC] 0.83) and reliability (ICC 0.91) confirm that the described field-based methodology is qualified for use to determine GCT in a practical setting. The implications of this study are important as they offer sport practitioners (S&C coaches, rehab specialists, and physios) a scalable method to assess GCT in the field to develop greater understanding of their athletes and improve performance, injury prevention, and rehabilitation interventions. Furthermore, these results provide the foundation for further work that could provide greater detail describing individual running gait in the field.

Publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

Subject

Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation,Orthopedics and Sports Medicine,General Medicine

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3