Advertisement

Sports Medicine

, Volume 32, Issue 10, pp 615–631 | Cite as

Muscle Strength Testing

Use of Normalisation for Body Size
Review Article

Abstract

Assessment of muscle strength tests has been a popular form of testing muscle function in sports and exercises, as well as in other movement-related sciences for several decades. Although the relationship between muscle strength and body size has attracted considerable attention from researchers, this relationship has been often either neglected or incorrectly taken into account when presenting the results from muscle strength tests. Two specific problems have been identified. First, most of the studies have presented strength data either non-normalised for body size, or normalised using inappropriate methods, or even several different normalisations have been applied on the same sets of data. Second, the role of body size in various movement performances has been neglected when functional movement performance was assessed by muscle strength. As a consequence, muscle function, athletic profiles, or functional movement performance assessed by tested muscle strength have been often confounded by the effect of body size. Differences in the normalisation methods applied also do not allow for comparison of the data obtained in different studies. Using the following allometric formula for obtaining index of muscle strength, S, independent of body size (assessed by body mass, m) should be recommended in routine strength testing procedures:

The allometric parameter should be either b = 0.67 for muscle force (recorded by a dynamometer), or b = 1 for muscle torque (recorded by an isokinetic apparatus). We also recommend using body-size-independent indices of both muscle strength and movement performance when assessing functional performance from recorded muscle strength or vice versa.

Keywords

Torque Body Size Muscle Strength Normalisation Method Muscle Force 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgements

The study was supported in part by grants from the Swedish Sport Research Council (Centrum for Idrottsforskning), the Swedish Council for Work Life Research and from the Serbian Research Council.

References

  1. 1.
    Abernethy P, Wilson G, Logan P. Strength and power assessment: issues, controversies and challenges. Sports Med 1995; 19: 401–17PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Keating JL, Matyas TA. The influence of subject and test design on dynamometric measurements of extremity muscles. Phys Ther 1996; 76: 866–89PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Wilson GJ, Murphy AJ. The use of isometric tests of muscular function in athletic assessment. Sports Med 1996; 22: 19–37PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sale DG. Testing strength and power. In: MacDougal JD, Wenger HA, Green HJ, editors. Physiological testing of the high performance athlete. Champaign (IL): Human Kinetics, 1991: 21–75Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Jaric S, Radosavljevic-Jaric S, Johansson H. Muscle force and muscle torque may require different methods when adjusting for body size. Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol. In pressGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Murphy AJ, Wilson GJ, Pryor JF. The use of isoinertial force mass relationship in the prediction of dynamic muscle performance. Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol 1994; 69: 250–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Pfeifer K, Banzer W. Motor performance in different dynamic tests in knee rehabilitation. Scand J Med Sci Sports 1999; 9: 19–27PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Pryor JF, Wilson GJ, Murphy AJ. The effectiveness of eccentric, concentric and isometric rate of force development tests. J Hum Mov Stud 1994; 27: 153–72Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ugarkovic D, Matavulj D, Kukolj M, et al. Body composition and strength predictors of jumping performance in junior basketball players. J Strength Cond Res. In pressGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sipila S, Suominen H. Knee extension strength and walking speed in relation to quadriceps muscle composition and training in elderly women. Clin Physiol 1994; 14: 433–42PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Viljanen T, Viitasalo JT, Kujala UM. Strength characteristics of a healthy urban adult population. Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol 1991; 63: 43–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Paasuke M, Ereline J, Gapeyeva H. Knee extension strength and vertical jumping performance in Nordic combined athletes. J Sports Med Phys Fitness 2001; 41: 354–61PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Sleivert GG, Backhus RD, Wenger HA. Neuromuscular differences between volleyball players, middle distance runners and untrained controls. Int J Sports Med 1995; 16: 390–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wisloff U, Helgrund J, Hoff J. Strength and endurance of elite soccer players. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1998; 30: 462–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Blackburn JR, Morrissey MC. The relationship between open and closed kinetic chain strength of the lower limb and jumping performance. J Orthop Sport Phys 1998; 27: 430–5Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Driss T, Vandewalle H, Monod H. Maximal power and force-velocity relationships during cycling and cranking exercises in volleyball players. J Sports Med Phys Fitness 1998; 38: 286–93PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Dooman CS, Vanderburgh PM. Allometric modeling of the bench press and squat: who is the strongest regardless of body mass? J Strength Cond Res 2000; 14: 32–6Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Murphy AJ, Wilson GJ. Poor correlations between isometric tests and dynamic performance: relationship to muscle activation. Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol 1996; 73: 353–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Vanderburgh PM, Dooman C. Considering body mass differences, who are the world’s strongest women? Med Sci Sports Exerc 2000; 32: 197–201PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Van Ingen Schenau GJ, De Koning JJ, Bakker FC, et al. Performance-influencing factors in homogeneous groups of top athletes: a cross-sectional study. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1996; 28: 1305–10PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Jensen RL, Freedson PS, Hamill J. The prediction of power and efficiency during near maximal rowing. Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol 1996; 73: 98–104PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Young W, McLean B, Ardagna J. Relationship between strength qualities and sprinting performance. J Sports Med Phys Fitness 1995; 35: 13–9PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Young W, Wilson G, Byrne C. Relationship between strength qualities and performance in standing and run-up vertical jumps. J Sports Med Phys Fitness 1999; 39: 285–93PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Akesson I, Hansson G-A, Balogh I, et al. Quantifying work load in neck, shoulders and wrists in female dentists. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 1997; 69: 461–74PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kwon IS, Oldaker S, Schrager M, et al. Relationship between muscle strength and the time taken to complete a standardized walk-turn-walk test. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 2001; 56 (9): B398–404CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Agre JC, Casal DC, Leon AS, et al. Professional ice hockey players: physiologic, anthropometric, and musculoskeletal characteristics. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1988; 69: 188–92PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Andersson E, Sward L, Thorstensson A. Trunk muscle strength in athletes. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1988; 20: 587–93PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Jaric S, Ugarkovic D, Kukolj M. Evaluation of methods for normalizing strength in elite and young athletes. J Sports Med Phys Fitness 2002; 42: 141–51PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Reilly T, Bangsbo J, Franks A. Anthropometric and physiological predispositions for elite soccer. J Sports Sci 2000; 18: 669–83PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Taylor NA, Cotter JD, Stanley SN, et al. Functional torquevelocity and power-velocity characteristics of elite athletes. Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol 1991; 62: 116–21PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Faria IE, Faria EW. Relationship of the anthropometric and physical characteristics of male junior gymnast to performance. J Sports Med 1989; 29: 369–78Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Cometti G, Maffiuletti NA, Pousson M, et al. Isokinetic strength and anaerobic power of elite, subelite and amateur French soccer players. Int J Sports Med 2001; 22: 45–51PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Fry RW, Morton AR. Physiological and kinanthropometric attributes of elite flatwater kayakists. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1991; 23: 1297–301PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Matavulj D, Kukolj M, Ugarkovic D, et al. Effects of plyometric training on jumping performance in junior basketball players. J Sports Med Phys Fitness 2001; 41: 159–64PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Abernethy PJ, Jurimae J, Logan PA, et al. Acute and chronic response of skeletal muscle to resistance exercise. Sports Med 1994; 17: 22–38PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Bell GJ, Wenger HA. Physiological adaptations to velocitycontrolled resistance training. Sports Med 1992; 13: 234–44PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Bemben MG, Murphy RE. Age related neural adaptation following short-term resistance training in women. J Sports Med Phys Fitness 2001; 41: 291–9PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Kanehisa H, Mitsumasa M. Specificity of velocity in strength training. Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol 1983; 52: 104–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Kraemer WJ, Mazzetti SA, Nindl BC, et al. Effect of resistance training on women’s strength/power and occupational performances. Med Sci Sport Exerc 2001; 33: 1011–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Murphy AJ, Spinks WL. The importance of movement specificity in isokinetic assessment. J Hum Move Stud 2000; 38: 167–83Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Mathiassen SE, Ahsberg E. Prediction of shoulder flexion endurance from personal factors. Int J Ind Ergon 1999; 24: 315–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Stevenson JM, Greenhorn DR, Bryant JT, et al. Gender differences in performance of a selection test using the incremental lifting machine. Appl Ergon 1996; 27: 45–52PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Akima H, Kano Y, Enomoto Y, et al. Muscle function in 164 men and women aged 20–84 yr. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2001; 33: 220–6PubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Marcora S, Miller MK. The effect of knee angle on the external validity of isometric measures of lower body neuromuscular function. J Sports Sci 2000; 18: 313–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Andrews AW, Thomas MW, Bohannon RW. Normative values for isometric force measurements obtained with hand-held dynamometers. Phys Therapy 1996; 76: 248–61Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Beenakker EAC, van der Hoeven JH, Fock JM, et al. Reference values of maximum isometric muscle force obtained in 270 children aged 4–16 years by hand-held dynamometry. Neuromuscul Disord 2001; 11: 441–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Reuter I, Engelhardt M, Stecker K, et al. Therapeutic value of exercise training in Parkinson’s disease. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1999; 31: 1544–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Fleck SJ, Falkel JE. Value of resistance training for the reduction of sports injuries. Sports Med 1986; 3: 61–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Magnusson SP, Constantini NW, McHugh MP, et al. Strength profiles and performance in masters’ level swimmers. Am J Sports Med 1995; 23: 626–31PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Takala EP, Viikari-Juntura E. Do functional tests predict low back pain? Spine 2000; 25: 2126–32PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Imrhan SN. Muscular strength in the elderly: implications for ergonomic design. Int J Ind Ergon 1994; 13: 125–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Kraemer WJ, Piorkowski PA, Bush JA, et al. The effects of NCAA division 1 intercollegiate competitive tennis match play on recovery of physical performance in women. J Strength Cond Res 2000; 14: 265–72Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Mandell PJ, Weitz E, Bernstein JI, et al. Isokinetic trunk strength and lifting strength measures: differences and similarities between low-back-injured and noninjured workers. Spine 1993; 18: 2491–501PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Desrosiers J, Bravo G, Hebert R, et al. Normative data for grip strength of elderly men and women. Am J Occup Ther 1995; 7: 637–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Astrand P-O, Rodahl K. Textbook of work physiology. 3rd ed. New York (NY): McGraw-Hill, 1986Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    McMahon TA. Muscles, reflexes and locomotion. Princeton (NJ): Princeton Press, 1984Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Nevill AM, Ramsbottom R, Williams C. Scaling physiological measurements for individuals of different body size. Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol 1992; 65: 110–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Vanderburgh PM, Mahar MT, Chou CH. Allometric scaling of grip strength by body mass in college-age men and women. Res Q Exerc Sport 1995; 66: 80–4PubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Hortobagyi T, Katch FI, Katch VL, et al. Relationships of body size, segmental dimensions, and ponderal equivalents to muscular strength in high-strength and low-strength subjects. Int J Sports Med 1990; 11: 349–56PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Delitto A, Crandell CE, Rose SJ. Peak torque-to-body weight ratios in the trunk: a critical analysis. Phys Ther 1989; 69: 138–43PubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Weir JP, Housh TJ, Johnson GO, et al. Allometric scaling of isokinetic peak torque: the Nebraska Wrestling Study. Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol 1999; 80: 240–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Hill AV. The dimensions of animals and their muscular dynamics. Sci Prog 1950; 38: 209–30Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Challis JH. Methodological report: the appropriate scaling of weightlifting performance. J Strength Cond Res 1999; 13: 367–71Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Davies MJ, Dalsky GP. Normalizing strength for body size differences in older adults. Med Sci Sports Exer 1997; 29: 713–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Batterham AM, George KP. Allometric modeling does not determine a dimensionless power function ratio for maximal muscular function. J Appl Physiol 1997; 83: 2158–66PubMedGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Neder JA, Nery LE, Silva AC, et al. Maximal aerobic power and leg muscle mass and strength related to age in non-athletic males and females. Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol 1999; 79: 522–30PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Nevill AM, Holder RL, Baxter-Jones A, et al. Modeling developmental changes in strength and aerobic power in children. J Appl Physiol 1998; 84: 963–70PubMedGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Jackson A. Strength measurement: controlling for individual differences. J Phys Edu Recreation Dance 1986; 57: 82–4Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Jaric S, Ugarkovic D, Kukolj M. Anthropometric, strength, power and flexibility variables in elite male athletes: basketball, handball, soccer and volleyball players. J Hum Mov Stud 2001; 40: 453–64Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    Sunnegardh J, Bratteby LE, Nordesjo LO, et al. Isometric and isokinetic muscle strength, anthropometry and physical activity in 8-year-old and 13-year-old Swedish Children. Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol 1988; 58: 291–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Abe T, Kawakami Y, Ikegava S, et al. Isometric and isokinetic knee-joint performance in Japanese alpine ski racers. J Sports Med Phys Fitness 1992; 32: 353–7PubMedGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Hakkinen K, Alen M, Komi PV. Neuromuscular, anaerobic, and aerobic performance characteristics of elite power athletes. Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol 1984; 53: 97–105PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Bale P. Anthropometric, body composition and performance variables of young elite female basketball players. J Sports Med Phys Fitness 1991; 31: 173–7PubMedGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Clarke DH, Hunt MQ, Dotson CO. Muscular strength and endurance as a function of age and activity level. Res Q Exerc Sport 1992; 63: 302–10PubMedGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Froese EA, Houston ME. Torque-velocity characteristics and muscle fiber type in human vastus lateralis. J Appl Physiol 1985; 59: 309–14PubMedGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    De Ste Croix MBA, Armstrong N, Weisman JR. Concentric isokinetic leg strength in pre-teen, teenage and adult males and females. Biol Sport 1999; 16: 75–86Google Scholar
  77. 77.
    Frontera WR, Hughes VA, Lutz KJ, et al. A cross-sectional study of muscle strength and mass in 45- to 78-yr-old men and women. J Appl Physiol 1991; 71: 644–50PubMedGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Hulens M, Vansant G, Lysens R, et al. Study of differences in peripheral muscle strength of lean versus obese women: an allometric approach. Int J Obes 2001; 25: 676–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Izquierdo M, Hakkinen K, Anton A, et al. Maximal strength and power, endurance performance, and serum hormones in middle-aged and elderly men. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2001; 33: 1577–87PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Paasuke M, Ereline J, Gapeyeva H, et al. Age-related differences in twitch contractile properties of plantarflexor muscles in women. Acta Physiol Scand 2000; 170: 51–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Vandewalle H, Peres G, Monod H. Standard aerobic exercise tests. Sports Med 1987; 4: 268–89PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Hakkinen K. Force production characteristics of leg extensor, trunk flexor and extensor muscles in male and female basketball players. J Sports Med Phys Fitness 1991; 31: 325–31PubMedGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Suei K, McGillis L, Calvert R, et al. Relationships among muscle endurance, explosiveness, and strength in circum-pubertal boys. Pediatr Exerc Sci 1998; 10: 48–56Google Scholar
  84. 84.
    Wiklander J, Lysholm J. Simple tests for surveying muscle strength and muscle stiffness in sportsmen. Int J Sports Med 1987; 8: 50–4PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Augustsson J, Thomee R. Ability of closed and open kinetic chain tests of muscular strength to assess functional performance. Scand J Med Sci Sports 2000; 10: 164–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Birch K, Sinnerton S, Reilly T, et al. The relation between isometric lifting strength and muscular fitness measures. Ergonomics 1994; 37: 87–93PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Jaric S, Ristanovic D, Corcos DM. Relations between kinetic parameters of active muscle groups and kinematic variables of a complex movement. Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol 1989; 59: 370–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    Kukolj M, Ropret R, Ugarkovic D, et al. Anthropometric, strength and power predictors of sprinting performance. J Sports Med Phys Fitness 1999; 39: 120–2PubMedGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    Ostenberg A, Roos E, Ekdahl C, et al. Isokinetic knee extensor strength and functional performance in healthy female soccer players. Scand J Med Sci Sports 1998; 8: 257–64PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    Pincivero DM, Lephart SM, Karunakara RG. Relation between open and closed kinematic chain assessment of knee strength and functional performance. Clin J Sport Med 1997; 7: 11–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. 91.
    Nindl BC, Mahar MT, Herman EA, et al. Lower and upper body anaerobic performance in male and female adolescent athletes. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1995; 27: 235–41PubMedGoogle Scholar
  92. 92.
    Barnekow-Bergkvist M, Hedberg G, Janlert U, et al. Development of muscular endurance and strength from adolescence to adulthood and level of physical capacity in men and women at age of 34 years. Scand J Med Sci Sports 1996; 6: 145–55PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    Hattori Y, Ono Y, Shimaoka M, et al. Effects of box weight, vertical location and symmetry on lifting capacities and ratings on category scale in Japanese female workers. Ergonomics 2000; 43: 2031–42PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. 94.
    Cronin J, McNair PJ, Marshall RN. Velocity specificity, combination training and sport specific tasks. J Sci Med Sport 2001; 4: 168–78PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. 95.
    Williford HN, Duey WJ, Olson MS, et al. Relationship between fire fighting suppression tasks and physical fitness. Ergonomics 1999; 42: 1179–86PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. 96.
    Richards JE, Ackland TR, Elliott BC. The effect of training volume and growth on gymnastic performance in young women. Pediatr Exerc Sci 1999; 11: 349–63Google Scholar
  97. 97.
    Hogan J. Structure of physical performance in occupational tasks. J Appl Physiol 1991; 76: 495–507Google Scholar
  98. 98.
    Fleishman EA. The structure and measurement of physical fitness. Englewood Cliffs (NJ): Prentice-Hall, 1964Google Scholar
  99. 99.
    Hollings SC, Robson GJ. Body build and performance characteristics of male adolescent track and field athletes. J Sports Med Phys Fitness 1991; 31: 178–82PubMedGoogle Scholar
  100. 100.
    Schmidt WD. Strength and physiological characteristics of NCAA division III American football players. J Strength Cond Res 1999; 13: 210–3Google Scholar
  101. 101.
    Malina RM, Bouchard C. Growth, maturation and physical activity. Champaign (IL): Human Kinetics Books, 1991Google Scholar
  102. 102.
    Forbes GB. Human body composition: growing, aging, nutrition and activity. New York (NY): Springer-Verlag, 1987Google Scholar
  103. 103.
    Landers KA, Hunter GR, Wetzstein CJ, et al. The interrelationship among muscle mass, strength, and the ability to perform physical tasks of daily living in younger and older women. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 2001; 56 (10): B443–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. 104.
    Gray A, Feldman HA, Mckinlay JB, et al. Age, disease, and changing sex hormone levels in middle-ages men: results of the Massachusetts male aging study. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1991; 73: 1016–25PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. 105.
    Hasue M, Fujiwara M, Kikuchi S. A new method of quantitative measurement of abdominal and back muscle strength. Spine 1980; 5: 143–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. 106.
    Ruby BC, Robergs RA. Gender differences in substrate utilisation during exercise. Sports Med 1994; 17: 393–410PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. 107.
    Baker D, Wilson G, Carlyon B. Generality versus specificity: a comparison of dynamic and isometric measures of strength and speed-strength. Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol 1994; 68: 350–5PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. 108.
    Morrissey MC, Harman EA, Johnson MJ. Resistance training modes: specificity and effectiveness. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1995; 27: 648–60PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Adis International Limited 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centre for Musculo-Skeletal ResearchNational Institute for Working LifeUmeaSweden
  2. 2.Institute for Medical ResearchBelgradeYugoslavia

Personalised recommendations