{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.031899468342194294, 'fraction_numerical': 0.012566457225712905, 'mean_word_length': 5.2727272727272725, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 1, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 2, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Alternating Consecutive Maximum Contractions as a Test of Muscle Function

Bozic, P, Suzovic, D, Nedeljkovic, A, and Jaric, S. Alternating consecutive maximum contractions as a test of muscle function. J Strength Cond Res 25(6): 1605-1615, 2011—Although regularly used, the standard strength test (SST) is known to have several shortcomings, such as being based only on sustained maximum forces, and on a relatively large number of trials that expose the tested muscle to rapid fatigue. The purpose of this study was to evaluate alternating consecutive maximum contractions (ACMCs) as a test of the muscle function through its comparison with SST. Twenty-four participants performed both the externally paced isometric ACMC (i.e., series of consecutive maximum force exertions in 2 directions) and SST of the knee extensor and flexor muscle. The derived variables of both tests included the knee extensor and flexor peak forces (PFs) and their maximum rates of development. Movement speed and muscle power output were also assessed through standard maximum performance tests. Both ACMC and SST revealed on average high intratrial (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] > 0.80) and moderate-to-high test-retest reliability (ICC > 0.60), and significant (p < 0.05) positive relationships among the PFs and their rates of development of the tested muscles. The variables of both tests also suggested on average moderate correlations with the maximum performance tests. Finally, ACMC variables revealed relatively stable values across a wide range of frequencies including the ‘self-selected’ one. Although some properties of ACMC could be similar to SST, the important comparative advantages of ACMC could be relatively low and transitional maximum forces exerted, and fewer trials needed for testing 2 antagonistic muscles. Although further research is needed, particularly concerning the external validity and generalizability, we conclude that the ACMC represents a test of muscle function that could be applied either as an alternative or complementary test to SST.