Home > Journals > Medicina dello Sport > Past Issues > Medicina dello Sport 2018 December;71(4) > Medicina dello Sport 2018 December;71(4):521-32



To subscribe
Submit an article
Recommend to your librarian


Publication history
Cite this article as



Medicina dello Sport 2018 December;71(4):521-32

DOI: 10.23736/S0025-7826.18.03226-X


language: English, Italian

Accuracy of force measurement via motion analysis system in artistic gymnastics

Bessem MKAOUER 1 , Helmi CHAABENE 2, Samiha AMARA 1, 3, Sarra HAMMOUDI-NASSIB 1, Yassine NEGRA 3, Monèm JEMNI 4

1 Higher Institute of Sport and Physical Education of Ksar Saïd, Manouba University, Manouba, Tunisia; 2 Tunisian Research Laboratory “Sports Performance Optimization,” National Center of Medicine and Science in Sports (CNMSS), Tunis, Tunisia; 3 Unit of Research, Higher Institute of Sports and Physical Education, Ksar Said, Tunisia; 4 College of Arts and Science, Qatar University, Doha, Qatar


BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to validate the accuracy of ground-reaction force measurement using inverse body dynamic analysis via video motion analysis system versus portable force-plate direct measurement system (i.e., gold standard model).
METHODS: Six elite-level male gymnasts (age =23.70±1.94 years; height =1.66±0.06 m; body mass =58.67±8.24 kg) participated in this study. The concurrent kinematic and dynamic analysis of the ground-reaction forces during snap-down take-off to back somersault were performed in the acrobatic series (i.e., round-off flic-flac back somersault).
RESULTS: The finding of the present study showed very good relative and absolute reliability of the motion analysis system outcomes (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] =0.953, typical error of measurement [TEM] =85.31 N, and TEM(%) =1.17%). Further, the motion analysis device demonstrated good ability to detect small and meaningful performance change (TEM< smallest worthwhile change [SWC]). No statistically significant differences were observed when comparing the ground-reaction force outcome between repetitions and devices (P>0.05; d=0.048). Additionally, results showed a nearly perfect association between the two methods (r=0.965 and R2=93%). The mean (bias)±95% limits of agreement between the two measurement devices was 341.0±508.8 N.
CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, inverse body dynamic analysis could be a good alternative to force-plate device for coaches to evaluate ground-reaction force in male artistic gymnastics.

KEY WORDS: Kinetics - Gymnastics - Exercise test

top of page