Intrasession Reliability and the Relationship Between the Explosive Bench Press and Medicine Ball Chest Pass Assessments of Upper Extremity Power

Document Type

Article

Publication Date

5-31-2012

Publication Title

Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise

ISSN

1530-0315

Abstract

The bench press throw and explosive bench press (EBP) test have recently received increased attention; however, both of these tests require specialized apparatus and instrumentation which limits their utilization in many settings. Medicine ball chest pass (MBCP) distance is a field test that also attempts to measure upper extremity power, however the optimal load has not been established.

PURPOSE: To determine the relationship between EBP peak power and MBCP test distance using 2kg, 3kg and 4kg loads and to determine the intrasession reliability of both tests.

METHODS: Twenty-seven healthy collegiate-level baseball players (20.5±1.5yrs; 1.82±.06m; 84.7±8.7kg) performed three MBCP trials using 2kg, 3kg, and 4kg MB loads. Instructions were given to hold medicine ball at shoulder level with feet shoulder width apart and knees straight, and to press the MB for maximal distance without countermovement. Initial impact sites of each trial determined distance. For the EBP trials, a standard 16kg barbell was loaded with and additional 14kg. Each subject was allowed a warm-up of 8 repetitions. Subjects then performed three maximum velocity bench press trials. An electromagnetic sensor (Motion Monitor, IST, Inc) offset from the bar with PVC pipe determined bar displacement. Displacement was then used to determine velocity, when coupled with the bar mass, provided power across each repetition. Both peak power and MBCP distance were averaged across three trials.

RESULTS: Strong intrasession reliability was revealed for the bench press and MBCP tests (ICC range=.933 to .977) Although correlational coefficients for 3kg (r=.647, 95% CI=.355 to .824) and 4kg (r=.612, 95% CI=.303 to .804) loads were slightly higher than 2kg (r=.482, 95% CI=.135 to .728) there was no significant difference between the three coefficients (P>.05).

CONCLUSIONS: Both the EBP and MBCP tests had strong intrasession reliability. If the EBP test is not feasible, then the slightly stronger relationships support using the 3kg or 4kg loads for the MBCP test as an alternative method of assessing upper extremity power. It should be recognized that although statistically significant, the relationships revealed were only moderate strength, suggesting that the tests may be measuring different aspects of upper extremity power.

Comments

© 2012 The American College of Sports Medicine

This document is currently not available here.

Share

COinS