AGREEMENT BETWEEN VITRUVE AND TENDO LINEAR POSITION TRANSDUCERS FOR ASSESSING MEAN AND PEAK VELOCITY DURING CLEAN AND SNATCH HIGH PULLS IN COLLEGIATE ATHLETES
Emily PERCINO, Julieta R. SANCHEZ, Viviana L. RAMIREZ, Mekhii R. MORRIS-HERON, Jennifer T. LIN, Ivan J. LEON, Monica ALCANTARA, Larissa M. BARRETO, Arturo SOSA III, Ernesto RAMIREZ, Tanner A. ROWE, Jenee M. RAGO, Carlos A. ESTRADA, Michael D. BELBIS
Abstract
Linear position transducers (LPT) are widely used to measure barbell velocity, a key metric in weightlifting movements such as snatch high pulls (SHP) and clean high pulls (CHP), which offer notable sports performance benefits. The purpose of this study was to examine the agreement between the Vitruve and Tendo LPTs for assessing mean and peak barbell velocity during clean high pulls (CHP) and snatch high pulls (SHP) performed at submaximal loads in collegiate athletes. Eighteen Division III athletes completed three laboratory visits. During the first visit, one-repetition maximum (1RM) values were established for the CHP and SHP. During the subsequent visits, participants performed single repetitions at 50%, 60%, 70%, and 80% of 1RM while barbell velocity was recorded simultaneously by both devices. Paired t-tests, effect sizes, Bland–Altman analyses, and regression of the difference scores versus the means were used to examine between-device differences, agreement, and proportional bias. No significant between-device differences were observed for CHP mean velocity, CHP peak velocity, or SHP mean velocity across the relative loads (all p > 0.05). In contrast, SHP peak velocity measured by Vitruve was lower than Tendo at 50% and 60% 1RM (p < 0.01), with the same directional pattern displayed at 70% and 80% 1RM. Bland–Altman analyses showed small mean biases for mean velocity across both lifts, whereas larger negative biases were evident for SHP peak velocity. Significant proportional bias was only observed for SHP mean velocity at 50% and 70% 1RM. These findings indicate that Vitruve and Tendo provide comparable mean velocity values during CHP and SHP performed at submaximal loads. Peak velocity should be interpreted more cautiously, particularly during the SHP at lighter loads. From an applied standpoint, mean velocity appears to be the more stable metric when comparing these devices during Olympic-derived pulling exercises.
Pages: 47 - 56