The Reliability of Four Different Methods. of Calculating Quadriceps Peak Torque Angle-Specific Torques at 30°, 60°, and 75 °

UNCG Author/Contributor (non-UNCG co-authors, if there are any, appear on document)
David H. Perrin, Former Provost and Executive Vice Chancellor (Creator)
The University of North Carolina at Greensboro (UNCG )
Web Site:

Abstract: Twelve university females were studied to determine the reliability of four different methods of calculating concentric and eccentric peak torque (PT) and angle-specific torques (ASTs) for knee extension. Each subject was tested on the Kin-Corn isokinetic dynamometer on two separate occasions, performing five concentric and eccentric contractions at 60° PT and AST at 30°, 60°, and 75° were calculated by averaging the first three contractions, averaging all five contractions, taking the single best value of the first three contractions, and taking the single best value of all five contractions. Intraclass correlation coefficients derived from these calculations showed high correlation among the four methods. Additionally, z tests performed on correlation coefficients transformed to Fisher's Z revealed no differences between pairs of correlation coefficients. These data appear to show there is no difference among the four methods of calculating PT and AST.

Additional Information

Journal of Sport Rehabilitation, 2: 243-250
Language: English
Date: 1993
Knee Extension, Concentric and Eccentric Peak Torque (PT), Angle-specific Torques (ASTs)

Email this document to