Evidence for data missing at random in youth physical activity monitoring research

This study examined whether or not activity monitor data collected as part of a typical 7-day physical activity (PA) measurement protocol can be expected to be missing at random. A total of 315 participants (9–18 years) each wore a SenseWear Armband monitor for 7 consecutive days. Participants were classified as “compliant” (86 boys and 124 girls) if they had recorded accelerometer data during 70% or more of the predefined awake time (7 AM–10 PM) on four different days; and “non-compliant” (44 boys and 51 girls) when not meeting these criteria. Linear mixed models were used to examine differences in energy expenditure (EE) levels by compliance across 10 different time periods. The results indicated that non-compliant girls were older (13.4 ± 2.9 vs. 12.2 ± 2.5) and taller (156.8 ± 10.3 vs. 152.8 ± 11.3) than their same gender compliant peers (P < .05). Comparisons of EE rates at segmented portions of the day revealed no differences between compliant and non-compliant groups (P ≥ .05). Differences in EE ranged from ?0.32 kcal · kg^?1 · h^?1 (before school time) to 0.62 kcal · kg^?1 · h^?1 (physical education class) in boys and ?0.39 kcal · kg^?1 · h^?1 (transportation from school) to 0.37 kcal · kg^?1 · hour^?1 (recess) in girls. The results showed that compliant and non-compliant individuals differed in a few demographic characteristics but exhibited similar activity patterns. This suggests that data were considered to be missing at random, but additional work is needed to confirm this observation in a representative sample of children using other types of activity monitors and protocols.     

Kicking modality during erratic-dynamic and static condition effects the muscular co-activation of attacker

The purpose of the study was to investigate the effect of different kicking modality, i.e., erratic-dynamic target (EDT) versus static target (ST) on the performance of the roundhouse kick in two groups of taekwondo athletes of different skill level. Three-dimensional analysis and surface electromyography (SEMG) analysis were performed on 12 (Group A: six sub-elite, Group B: six elite) athletes to investigate muscle co-activation pattern under two conditions, i.e., EDT versus ST. In the results, the muscle recruitment ratio of the agonistic muscles was higher for Group A, whereas Group B had higher recruitment ratio for antagonist muscles. Overall, the co-activation index (CI) of hip joints appeared higher in the extensors for Group A, whereas higher CI was observed in flexor muscles for Group B with comparatively higher CI during EDT condition than ST condition. Higher value of CI was observed in flexor muscles of the knee joints among Group A during EDT conditions, in contrast, higher CI in the extensor muscles was observed among Group B during ST conditions. In conclusion, the study confirmed that erratic-dynamic movements of target could change the movement coordination pattern to maintain the joint stability of participants.     

The energetics and benefit of an arm swing in submaximal and maximal vertical jump performance

The aims of this study were to investigate the energy build-up and dissipation mechanisms associated with using an arm swing in submaximal and maximal vertical jumping and to establish the energy benefit of this arm swing. Twenty adult males were asked to perform a series of submaximal and maximal vertical jumps while using an arm swing. Force, motion and electromyographic data were recorded during each performance and used to compute a range of kinematic and kinetic variables, including ankle, knee, hip, shoulder and elbow joint powers and work done. It was found that the energy benefit of using an arm swing appears to be closely related to the maximum kinetic energy of the arms during their downswing, and increases as jump height increases. As jump height increases, energy in the arms is built up by a greater range of motion at the shoulder and greater effort of the shoulder and elbow muscles but, as jump height approaches maximum, these sources are supplemented by energy supplied by the trunk due to its earlier extension in the movement. The kinetic energy developed by the arms is used to increase their potential energy at take-off but also to store and return energy from the lower limbs and to "pull" on the rest of the body. These latter two mechanisms become more important as jump height increases with the pull being the more important of the two. We conclude that an arm swing contributes to jump performance in submaximal as well as maximal jumping but the energy generation and dissipation sources change as performance approaches maximum.