RESUMO
ABSTRACT: García-Pinillos, F, Roche-Seruendo, LE, Marcen-Cinca, N, Marco-Contreras, LA, and Latorre-Román, PA. Absolute reliability and concurrent validity of the Stryd system for the assessment of running stride kinematics at different velocities. J Strength Cond Res 35(1): 78-84, 2021-This study aimed to determine the absolute reliability and to evaluate the concurrent validity of the Stryd system for measuring spatiotemporal variables during running at different velocities (8-20 km·h-1) by comparing data with another widely used device (the OptoGait system). Eighteen trained male endurance runners performed an incremental running test (8-20 km·h-1 with 3-minute stages) on a treadmill. Spatiotemporal parameters (contact time [CT], flight time [FT], step length [SL], and step frequency [SF]) were measured using 2 different devices (Stryd and OptoGait systems). The Stryd system showed a coefficient of variation (CV) <3%, except for FT (3.7-11.6%). The OptoGait achieved CV <4%, except for FT (6.0-30.6%). Pearson correlation analysis showed large correlations for CT and FT, and almost perfect for SL and SF over the entire protocol. The intraclass correlation coefficients partially support those results. Paired t-tests showed that CT was underestimated (p < 0.05, effect size [ES] > 0.7; â¼4-8%), FT overestimated (p < 0.05, ES > 0.7; â¼7-65%), whereas SL and SF were very similar between systems (ES < 0.1, with differences <1%). The Stryd is a practical portable device that is reliable for measuring CT, FT, SL, and SF during running. It provides accurate SL and SF measures but underestimates CT (0.5-8%) and overestimates FT (3-67%) compared with a photocell-based system.
Assuntos
Marcha , Corrida , Fenômenos Biomecânicos , Teste de Esforço , Masculino , Reprodutibilidade dos TestesRESUMO
This study aimed to evaluate the concurrent validity of two different inertial measurement units for measuring spatiotemporal parameters during running on a treadmill, by comparing data with a high-speed video analysis (VA) at 1,000 Hz. Forty-nine endurance runners performed a running protocol on a treadmill at comfortable velocity (i.e., 3.25 ± 0.36 m.s-1). Those wearable devices (i.e., Stryd™ and RunScribe™ systems) were compared to a high-speed VA, as a reference system for measuring spatiotemporal parameters (i.e. contact time [CT], flight time [FT], step frequency [SF] and step length [SL]) during running at comfortable velocity. The pairwise comparison revealed that the Stryd™ system underestimated CT (5.2%, p < 0.001) and overestimated FT (15.1%, p < 0.001) compared to the VA; whereas the RunScribe™ system underestimated CT (2.3%, p = 0.009). No significant differences were observed in SF and SL between the wearable devices and VA. The intra class correlation coefficient (ICC) revealed an almost perfect association between both systems and high-speed VA (ICC > 0.81). The Bland-Altman plots revealed heteroscedasticity of error (r2 = 0.166) for the CT from the Stryd™ system, whereas no heteroscedasticity of error (r2 < 0.1) was revealed in the rest of parameters. In conclusion, the results obtained suggest that both foot pods are valid tools for measuring spatiotemporal parameters during running on a treadmill at comfortable velocity. If the limits of agreement of both systems are considered in respect to high-speed VA, the RunScribe™ seems to be a more accurate system for measuring temporal parameters and SL than the Stryd™ system.
Assuntos
Teste de Esforço/instrumentação , Marcha/fisiologia , Corrida/fisiologia , Análise Espaço-Temporal , Dispositivos Eletrônicos Vestíveis , Adulto , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Gravação em Vídeo , Adulto JovemRESUMO
This study aimed to examine how the power output changes while running at a continuous comfortable velocity on a motorized treadmill by comparing running power averaged during different time intervals. Forty-nine endurance runners performed a running protocol on a treadmill at self-selected comfortable velocity. Power output (W) was estimated with the Stryd™ power meter, and it was examined over six recording intervals within the 3-min recording period: 0-10 s, 0-20 s, 0-30 s, 0-60 s, 0-120 s and 0-180 s. The ANOVAs showed no significant differences in the magnitude of the power output between the recording intervals (p=0.276, F=1.614, partial Eta 2 =0.155). An almost perfect association was also observed in the magnitude of the power output between the recording intervals (ICC≥0.999). Bland-Altman plots revealed no heteroscedasticity of error for the power output in any of the between-intervals comparisons (r 2<0.1), although longer recording intervals yield smaller systematic bias, random errors, and narrower limits of agreement for power output. The results show that power data during running, as measured through the Stryd™ system, is a stable metric with negligible differences, in practical terms, between shorter (i. e., 10, 20, 30, 60 or 120 s) and longer recording intervals (i. e., 180 s).