Quantification and description of physical work performance

This article raises the question of standardization of terms and evaluation of physical performance in the scientific literature. Basic parameters of scientific research as mass, volume, force, energy, work, power are considered. In keeping with the standardization of procedures in the reporting of various types of research and the increased requirements for scientific manuscript preparation, it is vitally important that investigators conform with standard terminology. The need for standard terminology is also evident in clinical settings where different health professionals must communicate and discuss rehabilitation interventions. Strict adherence to the definitions of the international system will ensure standardization of terminology and make scientific communication more readily understandable to the worldwide scientific community

Misuse of “Power” and other mechanical terms in sport and exercise science research

In spite of the Système International d’Unitès (SI) that was published in 1960, there continues to be widespread misuse of the terms and nomenclature of mechanics in descriptions of exercise performance. Misuse applies principally to failure to distinguish between mass and weight, velocity and speed, and especially the terms "work" and "power." These terms are incorrectly applied across the spectrum from high-intensity short-duration to long-duration endurance exercise. This review identifies these misapplications and proposes solutions. Solutions include adoption of the term "intensity" in descriptions and categorisations of challenge imposed on an individual as they perform exercise, followed by correct use of SI terms and units appropriate to the specific kind of exercise performed. Such adoption must occur by authors and reviewers of sport and exercise research reports to satisfy the principles and practices of science and for the field to advance

Balance in single-limb stance in healthy subjects – reliability of testing procedure and the effect of short-duration sub-maximal cycling

BACKGROUND: To assess balance in single-limb stance, center of pressure movements can be registered by stabilometry with force platforms. This can be used for evaluation of injuries to the lower extremities. It is important to ensure that the assessment tools we use in the clinical setting and in research have minimal measurement error. Previous studies have shown that the ability to maintain standing balance is decreased by fatiguing exercise. There is, however, a need for further studies regarding possible effects of general exercise on balance in single-limb stance. The aims of this study were: 1) to assess the test-retest reliability of balance variables measured in single-limb stance on a force platform, and 2) to study the effect of exercise on balance in single-limb stance, in healthy subjects. METHODS: Forty-two individuals were examined for test-retest reliability, and 24 individuals were tested before (pre-exercise) and after (post-exercise) short-duration, sub-maximal cycling. Amplitude and average speed of center of pressure movements were registered in the frontal and sagittal planes. Mean difference between test and retest with 95% confidence interval, the intraclass correlation coefficient, and the Bland and Altman graphs with limits of agreement, were used as statistical methods for assessing test-retest reliability. The paired t-test was used for comparisons between pre- and post-exercise measurements. RESULTS: No difference was found between test and retest. The intraclass correlation coefficients ranged from 0.79 to 0.95 in all stabilometric variables except one. The limits of agreement revealed that small changes in an individual's performance cannot be detected. Higher values were found after cycling in three of the eight stabilometric variables. CONCLUSIONS: The absence of systematic variation and the high ICC values, indicate that the test is reliable for distinguishing among groups of subjects. However, relatively large differences in an individual's balance performance would be required to confidently state that a change is real. The higher values found after cycling, indicate compensatory mechanisms intended to maintain balance, or a decreased ability to maintain balance. It is recommended that average speed and DEV 10; the variables showing the best reliability and effects of exercise, be used in future studies