Central Lancashire Online Knowledge (CLoK)

Title The Association Between Grip Strength and Isometric Mid-Thigh Pull
Performance in Elite Footballers
Type Article
URL https://clok.uclan.ac.uk/37119/
DOI https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scispo.2021.03.007
Date 2022
Citation Rhodes, David, Jeffery, Josh, Carling, Christopher, Mawene, Youl and
Alexander, Jill (2022) The Association Between Grip Strength and Isometric
Mid-Thigh Pull Performance in Elite Footballers. Science and Sports. ISSN
0765-1597
Creators Rhodes, David, Jeffery, Josh, Carling, Christopher, Mawene, Youl and
Alexander, Jill

It is advisable to refer to the publisher’s version if you intend to cite from the work.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scispo.2021.03.007

For information about Research at UCLan please go to http://www.uclan.ac.uk/research/

All outputs in CLoK are protected by Intellectual Property Rights law, including Copyright law.
Copyright, IPR and Moral Rights for the works on this site are retained by the individual authors
and/or other copyright owners. Terms and conditions for use of this material are defined in the
http://clok.uclan.ac.uk/policies/
 1 Title
2 The Association Between Grip Strength and Isometric Mid-Thigh Pull Performance in Elite Footballers
3
4 Titre

5 Association entre force de préhension et tirage isométrique mi-cuisse pour des footballeurs de haut
6 niveau.

7
8 Brief Running Head
9 Grip Strength Isometric Mid-Thigh Pull Elite Footballers
10
11 Authors
12 a
David Rhodes, b Josh Jeffery, c Chris Carling, dYoul Mawene, eJill Alexander.
13
14 Affiliations
15 a
Institute of Coaching and Performance (ICaP), School of Sport and Health Sciences, University of
16 Central Lancashire, Preston, Lancashire, United Kingdom.
17 Email - [email protected]
18 Telephone – 01772 895490
19
20 b
Everton Football Club, Finch Farm Training Complex, Finch Lane, Halewood, Liverpool, United
21 Kingdom.
22 Email - [email protected]
23 Telephone – 0151 556 1878
24
25 c
France Football Federation, Paris, France
26
27 d
Salford City Football Club, Moor Lane, Salford, Manchester, M7 3PZ
28
29 e
Sport, Nutrition and Clinical Sciences, School of Sport and Health Sciences, University of Central
30 Lancashire, Preston, Lancashire, United Kingdom.
31 Email - [email protected]
32 Telephone – 01772 892781
33
34 Corresponding Author
35 David Rhodes Ph.D. [email protected]
36
37 Funding
38 No funding was received for this research.
39
40 Declaration of interest statement
41 The authors report no conflict of interest.
42
43

44 Abstract
45
46 Objectives: The purpose of the present study was to analyse the association between grip strength and
47 performance of the standardised protocol of the isometric mid-thigh pull (IMTP) test.
48
49 Methods: 31 elite premier league footballers completed test-retest measures of peak force (PF) grip
50 strength and IMTP, measures were taken 7 days apart. Post completion of the test-retest 3 maximal
51 IMTP and bilateral grip strength measures were taken. Mean PF was calculated bilaterally for each
52 assessment. Linear relationships were determined for test-retest and Grip Strength Test (GST) and
53 IMTP PF output.
54
55 Results: Test-retest of the GST and IMTP displayed significant almost perfect correlations bilaterally
56 (p ≤ 0.001, r = 0.92 – 0.94, CI = 0.85 – 0.96). Bilateral moderate-large significant correlations were
57 also identified between grip strength and IMTP PF (p ≤ 0.05, r = 0.54 – 0.72, CI = 0.30 - 0.86).
58
59 Conclusions: GST and IMTP are reliable and repeatable measures. Findings in the present study
60 indicate consideration must be given to the influence of grip strength on maximal IMTP PF output.
61 Previous literature describes standardisation procedures for IMTP performance. Pre-completion of
62 IMTP measures in elite footballers, performance practitioners should consider assessment of the
63 athlete’s grip strength despite the use of lifting straps.
64
65 Key words: soccer, conditioning, injury risk, screening, assessment
66

67

68

69

70
71

72

73

74

75

76 Abstrait

77 Objectifs : Le but de cette étude était d’analyser l’association entre la force de préhension (ou force de
78 grippe) et les performances sur un test standardisé de tirage isométrique mi-cuisse (TIMC).

79

80 Méthodes : 31 joueurs de football haut niveau de Premier League prirent part à un test-retest mesurant
81 la force maximum (FM) de grippe et de tirage isométrique à mi-cuisse, enregistrés à 7 jours d’intervalle.
82 À la suite du test-retest, 3 mesures maximales de TIMC et de force de grippe bilatérale furent retenues.
83 La moyenne de FM bilatérale fut calculée pour chaque évaluation. La relation linéaire fut déterminée
84 entre le test-retest ; et entre la force de grippe et le tirage isométrique mi-cuisse.

85

86 Résultats : Les test-retest de force de grippe et de TIMC bilatérale ont montré, respectivement une
87 corrélation significative presque parfaite (p ≤ 0.001, r = 0.92 – 0.94, CI = 0.85 – 0.96). La FM de grippe
88 et le TIMC bilatérale ont aussi montré une corrélation significative modérée à large (p ≤ 0.05, r = 0.54
89 – 0.72, CI = 0.30 - 0.86).

90

91 Conclusions : La force de grippe et le TIMC sont des mesures fiables et reproduisibles. Les résultats
92 de l‘étude ici présente, indiquent que l’influence de la force de grippe sur les performances maximales
93 de TIMC doit être considérée. La standardisation des procédures de TIMC est précédemment décrite
94 dans la littérature. Préalable a des mesures de TIMC pour des footballeurs élites, préparateurs physiques
95 devraient considérer l’évaluation de la force de préhension des athlètes, quand bien même ils
96 utiliseraient des sangles.

97
98 Mots clés : football, conditionnement physique, risque de blessure, évaluation.
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109 INTRODUCTION
110
111 Injury risk factors in football are quantifiable via a battery of tests, with maximal strength commonly
112 reported and performed by practitioners to determine a player’s readiness to train or return to functional
113 activity post injury1,2. Quantifying strength output within elite athletic populations provides
114 contemporary debate amongst practitioners with regards to the type of test, timing of test within a
115 training week and metrics utilised. Literature has highlighted several forms of strength measures, which
116 include repetition max (RM), eccentric, concentric and isometric, to name a few3,4,5. The diverse nature
117 of the equipment utilised to determine strength output also poses a predicament for sports performance
118 practitioners, with decisions drawn on the sensitivity of the test and reliability of measures taken6.
119 Debate surrounding the type of strength testing selected in an elite performance environment should
120 consider the following factors: relationship to mechanisms of common injuries, transferability of the
121 information to performance and potential detrimental effects of the test on the athlete7.
122
123 Concentric tests have been criticised in literature for not replicating muscular demand during functional
124 performance and have limited association with the mechanisms of injury associated with common
125 injuries in football, i.e. hamstrings8,9. Utilisation of RM testing has been documented as transferable to
126 performance and literature has demonstrated its reliability10. The fatiguing nature of determining an
127 individual’s RM however is a concern for practitioners and utilised within a normal training week could
128 potentially increase injury risk1. Quantifying elite athlete’s eccentric strength profile is a common
129 approach utilised within football8. This is due to its association with injury risk and functional
130 performance9. Literature has continuously highlighted the damaging nature of eccentric muscle
131 contractions11,12, providing sports performance practitioners with the dilemma of how to incorporate
132 this muscle assessment when players are in competition, particularly within fixture congested periods13.
133
134 A contemporary alternative to quantify lower limb strength parameters in athletes is the isometric mid-
135 thigh pull (IMTP)14,15. Isometric strength testing is highly reliable, has low measurement error and
136 variability4,6 and is less provocative than eccentric testing, thus reducing the risk of injury6,14,15. In
137 addition, IMTP testing has displayed strong correlations between short explosive sprints, representing
138 an acceleration in football to press play and speed of change of direction16. Suggesting measures of
139 IMTP link closely with performance output. However, debate exists as to whether these performance
140 relationships exist between absolute or relative peak force (PF) measures17,18. Literature also highlights
141 strong associations with dynamic strength exercises, indicating that the IMTP performance is a clear
142 indicator of strength output19. Early research identified issues surrounding standardisation of the
143 testing protocols within papers, but this was addressed by Comfort et al., (2019)1. Key considerations
144 highlighted in the paper emphasised consideration of bar height, body position, grip width, foot position
145 and consistency of these measures within each lift the athlete completes.
146
147 Literature has discussed the use of lifting straps/athletic tape to reduce the effect of grip strength as a
148 limiting factor20,21. Although, it is noted that actual effect of grip strength when utilising the current
149 standardised protocol suggested by Comfort et al., (2019)1, has not been analysed. Successful
150 completion of the IMTP requires the athlete to grip the bar and push as hard as possible with the legs to
151 generate force1. Theoretically, requiring significant grip strength to be able to perform the IMTP
152 effectively and produce maximal force. Reliance on lifting straps to successfully perform the lift would
153 potentially place excessive load through the wrist joint, causing discomfort to the athlete and thus the
154 potential to reduce force application. Examination of the relationship between grip strength and IMTP
155 performance is limited within current literature. Although handgrip strength may not be directly
156 associated with usual characteristic assessment in footballers per se, determining whether grip strength
157 is a factor in IMTP performance may have implications on the output generated by the athlete when
158 performing a maximal IMTP test. Therefore, the aim of the present study is to determine the relationship
159 between the hand grip strength and IMTP in elite players within a premier league football club.
160
161 METHODS
162
163 Subjects
164
165 Thirty-one elite U23 category 1-status academy male footballers from an English Premier League
166 Football Club completed the present study, age 20.98±2.49 years; height 183.40±8.93 cm and weight
167 77.65±8.38 kg. All players eligible for the study were in full training, free from injury and available
168 for competitive selection. Normal screening protocols completed at the club include completion of the
169 IMTP test, therefore each player has been exposed to the protocols completed in the present study.
170 Players were advised to refrain from caffeine or additional supplement intake up to 24 hours prior to
171 data collection. This bout of testing was completed in a normal training week, mid-competitive season
172 when the players had returned post a recovery day. All participants provided written informed consent
173 in accordance with the department and host university faculty research ethics committees, and in
174 accordance with the Helsinki Declaration (2018).
175
176 Design
177
178 This was an experimental study designed to investigate the reliability of grip strength test (GST) and
179 standardised IMTP test in elite footballers. Further to this, the study analysed the linear relationships
180 between maximal grip strength on the IMTP peak force (PF) output of elite male footballers. All
181 subjects completed all testing within the study. Prior to any testing anthropometric data of each of the
182 athletes was taken and familiarisation trials of both the GST and standardised IMTP test were
183 completed. Week 1 subjects were asked to complete 3 maximal seated, elbow extended grip strength
184 measures utilising a hand-held dynamometer, followed by 3 maximal IMTP. This process was repeated
185 on week 2. Mean scores from each of the 3 lifts were then taken for analysis from each week. Each of
186 the familiarisation and testing sessions were separated by 7 days. Week 3 consisted of each athlete
187 completing 3 maximal grip strength measures and 3 maximal IMTP measures. Again, mean scores of
188 the 3 measures were taken for analysis and linear correlations were calculated for PF measures.
189
190 Methodology
191
192 Participants completed a familiarisation trial 7 days prior to testing to negate potential learning effects22.
193 This included completion of 3 maximal repetitions of the hand grip dynamometer (left and right) and
194 IMTP. Prior to any testing all participants completed the standardised dynamic warm up protocol
195 proposed by Comfort et al., (2019)1, which consisted of 3 second repetitions of IMTP performance at
196 50%, 75% and 90% maximal efforts, each completed 60 seconds apart. All testing was completed
197 between 13:00 and 17:00 hrs to account for the effect of circadian rhythm and in accordance with regular
198 competition times23. Post familiarisation trials all participants completed a test-retest to determine the
199 reliability of measures on both the hand grip dynamometer and IMTP. Measures on both pieces of
200 equipment were completed on two separate occasions, with 7 days between test and retest to consider
201 learning and fatigue effects22. On completion of the test-retest data collection, participants were again
202 given a further 7 days before completion of 3 maximal IMTP lifts and 3 maximal grip strength tests to
203 determine correlation.
204
205 All hand grip testing was completed with the same hand grip dynamometer (Jamar ® Hydraulic Hand
206 Dynamometer (Model J00105) (Sammons Preston, Bolingbrook, Illinois)) adhering to ASHT
207 (American Society of Hand Therapists) clinical assessment guidelines24. The dynamometer was set at
208 the second handle position for each participant. Each player sat in a straight-backed chair, with back
209 supported and feet flat on the floor. The shoulder was adducted and neutrally rotated and forearm/wrist
210 in neutral position. The elbow was extended to replicate the position it would be in when completing
211 the IMTP, this position has previously shown excellent reliability25. The dominant and non-dominant
212 side were both subjected to 3 measures of maximal grip strength on the dynamometer, with the average
213 of the 3 combined scores utilised for analysis.
214
215 Completion of all IMTP testing followed the standardisation protocol1. Measurements of PF were
216 obtained by completing the IMTP via a force platform (ForceDecks FD4000 (ValdPerformance,
217 Australia, 2018). Prior to completion of the IMTP correct body position for each participant was
218 determined and repeated for each test completed. Bar height was set to replicate the 2nd pull position
219 during the clean, adjusting to ensure that optimal knee (125-145°) and hip (140-150°) angles were set,
220 due to body position being shown to significantly affect force generation4,14,15, 26
. Angles were
221 quantified utilising a hand-held goniometer. The goniometer was placed on the lateral femoral condyle,
222 with upper arm following the line of the femur and lower arm tracing the line of the fibula to quantify
223 knee angle. Hip angle was determined by placing the goniometer on the greater trochanter, with the
224 upper arm tracing the torso and lower arm the line of the femur.
225
226 Once angles of the two joints were determined, observation of the position of the athlete was made,
227 ensuring an upright torso with slight flexion of the knee and dorsiflexion of the ankle. Shoulder girdle
228 was retracted and depressed, with the shoulders above or slightly behind the vertical plane of the bar.
229 Feet were hip width apart and centred beneath the bar, with the thighs in contact with the bar.
230 Positioning of the athlete and a final assessment was completed to ensure they were in the correct
231 position and no tension was applied to the bar due to its negative effect on joint angle4. A record of
232 each participant’s body position ensured consistency of testing within each repeated lift. During each
233 lift completed athletes were secured to the bar with lifting straps placed around the wrists20,21.
234
235 On the completion of each lift the athlete was provided with standardised instructions provided by the
236 club’s strength and conditioning coach. These included pushing the feet as hard as possible in to the
237 ground; drive the feet in to the force platform not pulling the bar with the arms or rising on the toes;
238 apply pretension to ensure correct body position and allow a pre-test force baseline (achieved by
239 observing the force trace to ensure it was consistent with body mass); provide a countdown of 3-2-1
240 Pull to initiate the IMTP to maximum. During the test the athlete was provided with verbal
241 encouragement27, completing 3 successful maximal trials without any errors. Ensuring each trail was
242 within 250N of one another20,21.
243
244 Statistical Analysis
245
246 All participants completed 3 assessments on the hand GST and IMTP. Each assessment consisted of 3
247 repetitions within each test, with maximal grip strength and IMTP PF being ascertained. Mean force
248 for both GST and IMTP for both the left and right sides were taken for data analysis. Force data for
249 both GST and IMTP were displayed as Newtons (N) and Peak Force (PF). These values were identified
250 for each participant and utilised for analysis.
251
252 Pearson’s correlation coefficients were calculated to quantify the linear relationship between test-retest
253 for both IMTP and GST. This was also completed to determine the linear relationship between GST
254 and IMTP force outputs. All statistical analysis was completed using PASW Statistics Editor 25.0 for
255 windows (SPSS Inc, Chicago, USA). Statistical significance was set at P ≤ 0.05. Coefficient of
256 correlation (r) and respective level of significance (p value) describes total variance. The following
257 criteria quantified magnitude of the correlation <0.1, trivial; >0.1 to 0.3, small; >0.3 to 0.5, moderate;
258 >0.5 to 0.7, large; >0.7 to 0.9, very large; and >0.9 to 1.0, almost perfect.
259
260 RESULTS
261
262 Table 1 summarises the mean and standard deviation scores achieved for all metrics observed within
263 the present study.
264
265 ***Insert table 1 here***
266
267 Test-retest of the GST displayed significant correlations for both the left (p ≤ 0.001, r = 0.92, CI = 0.88
268 – 0.96) and right hand (p ≤ 0.001, r = 0.93, CI = 0.89 – 0.97). Displaying almost perfect correlations
269 between each test, indicating excellent test-retest reliability. The same was also noted for the IMTP
270 test-retest when utilising Comfort et al., (2019) standardisation protocol. Bilaterally IMTP PF displayed
271 significant correlations, left (p ≤ 0.001, r = 0.92, CI = 0.85 – 0.97) and right (p ≤ 0.001, r = 0.94, CI =
272 0.91 – 0.96).
273 *** Insert Table 2 Here ***
274 *** Insert Table 3 Here ***
275
276 Significant correlations displayed between GST, tested with the handheld dynamometer, and PF
277 ascertained via IMTP performance on the ForceDecks (Grip (L) and IMTP (L): p ≤ 0.05, r = 0.72, CI =
278 0.55 – 0.86 and Grip (R) and IMTP (R): p = 0.01, r = 0.54, CI = 0.30 – 0.77). Contralateral relationships
279 between grip strength and PF also displayed no significant correlation between Grip (L) and IMTP (R):
280 p > 0.05, r = 0.22, CI = -0.19 – 0.62, but significant between Grip (R) and IMTP (L): p ≤ 0.05, r = 0.35,
281 CI = 0.12 – 0.60). Significant correlations were also displayed between GST (L) and (R) (p ≤ 0.001, r
282 = 0.68, CI = 0.46 – 0.83). No significant correlations were displayed between IMTP (L) and IMTP (R),
283 (p > 0.05, r = -0.02, CI = -0.36 – 0.36).
284 *** Insert Table 4 Here ***
285 ***Insert Figure 1 Here***
286
287 DISCUSSION
288
289 The aim of the present study was to ascertain the reliability of repeated measures of GST and IMTP
290 within an elite football population and to investigate the relationship between grip strength and IMTP
291 performance. PF measures within both tests were ascertained and utilised for comparison. The test-
292 retests performed on both the GST and IMTP testing highlighted almost perfect correlations, suggesting
293 both testing procedures were extremely reliable in this athletic population. These findings were
294 consistent with previous literature4,6. Isometric contractions have been shown to be less damaging than
295 other methods of muscle assessment6,14,15. Thus, making them an attractive method of assessing a
296 player’s readiness to train or injury risk, particularly in periods of competition or fixture congestion13.
297 PF measures ascertained from the IMTP test have been associated with measures of functional
298 performance16. Although, it is strongly debated that these PF measures are required to be relative to the
299 subject’s weight17,18. Absolute PF measures were taken within the present study, as the objective was
300 to ascertain whether grip strength still influenced force output when completing the IMTP despite the
301 use of the standardised protocol proposed by Comfort et al., (2019)1. Sports performance practitioners
302 should carefully consider the metrics observed when completing the IMTP test when quantifying the
303 athlete’s readiness to train, progression in rehabilitation or identification of injury risk.
304
305 Main findings from the present study highlight significant moderate to large correlations between
306 players grip strength in relation to PF and their IMTP performance (0.54 - 0.72). It is suggested that
307 securing of the participants to the bar with lifting straps, may reduce the effect of grip strength on IMTP
308 performance, but it does not eliminate its effect, as suggested in earlier literature20,21. Importantly,
309 findings from this current body of work indicate that grip effect can still not be discounted despite
310 utilisation of a standardised protocol1. Poor grip strength when performing IMTP maximally may have
311 implications of loading through the wrist particularly when attached to the bar with lifting straps. The
312 straps and load applied when performing the test may cause a distraction of the wrist, resulting in
313 discomfort to the athlete and thus reducing the amount of force applied. The effects of this could be
314 catastrophic in youth athletes with an immature skeleton28. It must also be considered that athletes may
315 place less emphasis on gripping the bar due to the attachment of lifting straps. Either scenario could
316 potentially result in reduced/poor performance or injury risk.
317
318 Practitioners must be prudent to advise that despite the use of lifting straps athletes must apply maximal
319 grip to the bar when performing. This approach should be considered in any standardisation protocol
320 associated with the IMTP. Previous literature20,21 cited by Comfort et al., (2019)1 identified the use of
321 lifting straps, taping or a combination of both. Both papers described that the utilisation of these
322 methods ensured that grip strength was not a limiting factor in the IMTP protocol. It is important to
323 note that although these papers identified interclass correlation coefficients (ICC) scores for the
324 described methods completed, they did not identify grip strength performance of the athletes.
325 Comparisons were made between varying metrics associated with IMTP and a dynamic lift. Therefore,
326 not allowing the assumption that grip strength was no longer a limiting factor. The present study
327 directly identifies relationships between grip strength and IMTP performance. Further research in this
328 area should consider ICC values of athletes performing IMTP with and without wrist support, but also
329 compare outputs in relation to wrist support method utilised in the lift.
330
331 Recent studies indicate several positive reasons for utilising the IMTP test as a method of quantification
332 to inform injury risk, readiness to train or play or a progression marker in rehabilitation29,30. The
333 findings of the present study clearly support these earlier conclusions. Emphasis is placed on legs
334 pushing through the floor during performance of the IMTP to exert maximum output. Although the
335 present study analyses the effect of grip strength it is important to appreciate that performance of the
336 IMTP requires stabilisation of the hips, as well as maintaining a good posture representative of the
337 second pull position. Any failure to maintain this throughout performance of the IMTP may result in
338 inaccurate outputs being produced. If the grip strength of the athlete is not adequate the athlete may
339 create pull from other areas of the body, meaning an adjustment of the position described in the methods
340 of the current and previous papers1,4. It is important to emphasise to the athlete or practitioners the
341 effect inadequate grip application may have on performance. Thus, highlighting that pre performance
342 of this test practitioners may consider performance of a GST.
343
344 Limitations:
345
346 The present study identifies relationships between grip strength and IMTP performance. Limitations
347 exist within the present body of work, most notably failure to consider other metrics exhibited during
348 the IMTP test. Future work in this area could consider other performance metrics exhibited in the IMTP
349 test like rate of force development (RFD), another metric like PF that has been strongly associated
350 within literature with functional performance1. Positioning of the athletes during testing was
351 standardised in relation to protocols described in previous work, but the effect of poor positioning was
352 not quantified1. Further research should consider the effect poor grip strength may have on the athletes
353 positioning when performing the IMTP test. Consideration must also be given to other limiting factors
354 associated with the performance of the IMTP, which may include reduced dorsiflexion of the ankle or
355 poor shoulder and shoulder girdle function. Sports performance practitioners need to consider the
356 importance of these factors and appropriately screen the athlete to ensure optimal performance can be
357 achieved when completing the IMTP test.
358
359 PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS
360
361 • Consideration must be given to the effect of grip strength on IMTP performance when utilised
362 as a test to quantify maximum PF in elite footballers.
363 • Although grip strength has implications on maximum PF output, the IMTP test still represents
364 a reliable and repeatable test for quantifying PF output in elite footballers.
365 • Careful consideration should be given to assessing the grip strength of the athlete pre
366 completion of the standardised protocol for IMTP test.
367

368 APLICATIONS PRATIQUES

369

370 • L’effet de la force de grippe sur les performances de TIMC doit être considéré dans un test de
371 force maximal pour des joueurs élites de football.
372 • Bien que la force de grippe soit impliquée dans la force maximal produite, le TIMC reste un
373 test fiable et reproduisible pour la quantifier la force maximale de joueurs élites de football.
374 • L’évaluation de la force de grippe des athlètes préalablement a un test standardise de TIMC
375 devrait être considérée avec attention.

376
377
378
379 CONCLUSIONS
380
381 The findings of the present study suggest that grip strength has an influence on IMTP test performance.
382 The importance of a standardised protocol has previously been identified and should continually be
383 utilised within IMTP testing within elite sports performance environments. Although it is important for
384 practitioners to consider the assessment of an athlete’s grip strength pre a maximum PF test. Further
385 research should consider the utilisation of quantifying maximum PF output with the IMTP. Thought
386 should be given to analysing grip strength and other quantifiable measures of lower limb PF.
387
388 CONCLUSIONS

389

390 Les résultats de l’étude ici présente suggèrent que la force de grippe a une influence sur les performances
391 de test de TIMC. L’importance d’un protocole standardise a déjà été identifié précédemment, et devrait
392 continuer à être utiliser pour le test TIMC dans le contexte de la performance sportive de haut niveau.
393 Il est toutefois important pour les préparateurs physiques de considérer l’évaluation de la force de grippe
394 des athlètes avant un test maximal de TIMC. Davantage d’études devraient considérer l’utilisation de
395 quantifier les mesures maximales de force de TIMC. Une attention particulière devrait être donnée à
396 l’analyse de la force de grippe et autres mesures quantifiables de la force maximale des membres
397 inférieurs.

398
399
400 REFERENCES
401
402 1. Comfort, P, Dos Santos, T, Beckham, et al. Standardisation and Methodological
403 Considerations for the Isometric Midthigh Pull. Strength Cond J, 2019; 41: 57-79.
404 2. Seitz, LB, Reyes, A, Tran, TT, de Villarreal, ES, Haff, GG. Increases in lower-body strength
405 transfer positively to sprint performance: A systematic review with meta-analysis. Sports Med,
406 2014; 44: 1693–1702.
407 3. Anastasi, S, Hamzeh, M. ‘Does the Eccentric Nordic Hamstring Exercise Have an Effect on
408 Isokinetic Muscle Strength Imbalance and Dynamic Jumping Performance in Female Rugby
409 Union Players?’ Isokin Ex Sci, 2011; 19: 251-260.
410 4. Beckham, G, Sato, K, Santana, H, et al. Effect of body position on force production during the
411 isometric mid-thigh pull. J Strength Con Res, 2018; 32: 48-56.
412 5. Dauty, M, Potiron-Josse, M, Rochcongar, P. Identification of previous hamstring muscle injury
413 by isokinetic concentric and eccentric torque measurement in elite soccer player. Isokin Ex Sci,
414 2003; 11: 139-144.
415 6. De Witt, J, English, K, Crowell, J, et al. Isometric mid-thigh pull reliability and relationship to
416 deadlift. J Strength Con Res, 2018; 32: 528-533.
417 7. Opar, DA, Piatkowski, T, Williams, MD, Shield, AJ. A Novel Device Using the Nordic
418 Hamstring Exercise to Assess Eccentric Knee Flexor Strength: A Reliability and Retrospective
419 Injury Study. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther, 2013; 43: 636-640.
420 8. Greig, M. The Influence of Soccer-Specific Fatigue on Peak Isokinetic Torque Production of
421 the Knee Flexors and Extensors. Am J Sports Med, 2008; 36: 1403-1409.
422 9. Rhodes, D, McNaughton, L, Greig, M. The Temporal Pattern of Recovery in Eccentric
423 Hamstring Strength Post Soccer Specific Fatigue. Res Sports Med, 2018; 27: 339-350.
424 10. Seo, DI, Kim, E, Fahs, CA, et al. Reliability of the One Repetition Maximum Test Based on
425 Muscle Group and Gender. J Sports Sci Med, 2012; 11: 221-225.
426 11. Fonda, B, Sarabon, N. Effects of Whole Body Cryotherapy on Recovery after Hamstring
427 Damaging Exercise: A Crossover Study. Med Sci Sports, 2013; 23: 270-278.
428 12. Marshall, PWM, Lovell, R, Knox, MF, Brennan, SL, Siegler, JC. Hamstring Fatigue and
429 Muscle Activation Changes During Six Sets of Nordic Hamstring Exercise in Amateur Soccer
430 Players. J Strength Cond Res, 2015; 29: 3124-3133.
431 13. Bengtsson, H, Ekstrand, J, Walden, M, Hagglund, M. Muscle Injury Rates in Professional
432 Football Increase with Fixture Congestion: An 11-Year Follow-Up of the UEFA Champions
433 League Injury Study. Br J Sports Med, 2014; 48: 566-567.
434 14. Dos’Santos, T, Thomas, C, Jones, PA, McMahon, JJ, Comfort, P. The effect of hip joint angle
435 on isometric mid-thigh pull kinetics. J Strength Cond Res, 2017a ; 31: 2748–2757.
436 15. Dos’Santos, T, Jones, PA, Comfort, P, Thomas, C. Effect of different onset thresholds on
437 isometric mid-thigh pull force-time variables. J Strength Cond Res, 2017b ; 31: 3467–3473.
438 16. Spiteri, T, Nimphius, S, Hart, NH, et al. Contribution of strength characteristics to change of
439 direction and agility performance in female basketball athletes. J Strength Cond Res, 2014; 28:
440 2415-2423.
441 17. Nuzzo, JL, McBride, JM, Cormie, P, McCaulley, GO. Relationship between countermovement
442 jump performance and multijoint isometric and dynamic tests of strength. J Strength Cond Res,
443 2008; 22: 699-707.
444 18. Stone, MH, Sands, WA, Carlock, J, et al. The importance of isometric maximum strength and
445 peak rate-of-force development in sprint cycling. J Strength Cond Res, 2004; 18: 878–884.
446 19. McGuigan, MR, Newton, MJ, Winchester, JB, Nelson, AG. Relationship between isometric
447 and dynamic strength in recreationally trained men. J Strength Cond Res, 2010; 24: 2570–2573.
448 20. Haff, GG, Stone, M, O’Bryant, HS, et al. Forcetime dependent characteristics of dynamic and
449 isometric muscle actions. J Strength Cond Res, 1997; 11: 269–272.
450 21. Haff, GG, Carlock, JM, Hartman, MJ, et al. Force-time curve characteristics of dynamic and
451 isometric muscle actions of elite women olympic weightlifters. J Strength Cond Res, 2005; 19:
452 741–748.
453 22. Hinman M. Factors Affecting Reliability of the Biodex Balance System: A summary of Four
454 Studies. J Sport Rehabil, 2000; 9: 240-252.
455 23. Sedliak, M, Haverinen, M, Hakkinen, K. Muscle Strength, Resting Muscle Tone and EMG
456 Activation in Untrained Men: Interaction Effect of time of Day and Test Order-Related
457 Confounding Factors. J Sports Med Phys Fit, 2011; 51: 560–570.
458 24. Fess, EE, Moran, CA. Clinical Assessment Recommendations. American Society of Hand
459 Therapists. 1981; Pg 6.
460 25. Savva, C, Karagiannis, C. Test-Retest Reliability of Grip Strength Measurement in Full Elbow
461 Extension to Evaluate Maximum Grip Strength. J Hand Surg, 2012; 38: 183-186.
462 26. Beckham, G, Lamont, H, Sato, K, et al. Isometric strength of powerlifters in key positions of
463 the conventional deadlift. J Trainology, 2012; 1: 32-25.
464 27. Belkhiria, C, De Marco, G, Driss, T. Effects of verbal encouragement on force and
465 electromyographic activations during exercise. J Sports Med Phys Fitness, 2018; 58: 750–757.
466 28. Gall, FL, Carling, C, Williams, M, Reilly, T. Anthropometric and Fitness Characteristics of
467 International, Professional and Amateur Male Graduate Soccer players from an Elite Youth
468 Academy. J Sci Med Sport, 2010; 13: 90-95.
469 29. Byrne, C, Eston, R, Edwards, R. Characteristics of isometric and dynamic strength loss
470 following eccentric exercise- induced muscle damage. Scand J Med Sci, 2001; 11: 134-140.
471 30. Dobbin, N, Hunwicks, R, Jones, B, et al. Criterion and construct validity of an isometric mid-
472 thigh pull dynamometer for assessing whole body strength in professional rugby league players.
473 Int J Sports Physiol Per, 2018; 13: 235-239.
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482