New Hip Adductor Isometric Strength Test on Force Platform Shows Good and Acceptable Intra-Test Reliability for Peak Force Measurement
, Felipe Hermosilla-Palma 3, Nicolás Gómez-Álvarez 1, Jorge Pérez-Contreras 4,5, Bianca Miarka 6, Carlos Gomes de Oliveira 7, Ciro José Brito 8, Luciano Luporini Menegaldo 2, Kristof Kipp 9 and Esteban Aedo-Muñoz 8,*Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe authors must be commended for carrying out a study regarding the reliability of hip adductor isometric strength testing on the force plates. This topic is interesting and practically important in the field of sports diagnostics, training process and injury prevention. The research methodology used in the study is appropriate and it is written with good clarity. However, some issues need to be taken into consideration. Please find my specific comments below.
Title
Since you measured muscle force expressed in N, please use the term ‘’isometric strength’’, in the title and throughout the text.
Introduction
Please emphasize at the end of the discussion the significance of the present study and its possible impact on practice and future research.
Methods
Why did you conduct the study on this specific sample of participants? Please elaborate.
Why did you use this specific testing procedure? Were you guided by some previous studies? Please elaborate.
Results
I strongly suggest expanding the result section, elaborating in more detail the presented results (in text).
Discussion
Please add a study limitations.
Author Response
Title
Since you measured muscle force expressed in N, please use the term ‘’isometric strength’’, in the title and throughout the text.
response: isometric strenght was added
Introduction
Please emphasize at the end of the discussion the significance of the present study and its possible impact on practice and future research.
response: the suggestion was added in discusion
Methods
Why did you conduct the study on this specific sample of participants? Please elaborate.
response: These was justified in the introduction (injuries in team sport athltes) and was added these: A convenience sample was used
Why did you use this specific testing procedure? Were you guided by some previous studies? Please elaborate.
response: we added the justification of the angles (Lovell et al. 2012)
Results
I strongly suggest expanding the result section, elaborating in more detail the presented results (in text).
response: the text was expanded
Discussion
Please add a study limitations.
response: limitations were added
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsDear Authors,
First of all, I would like to thank you for the opportunity to review your study. The proposal aims to develop a test to assess the functional capacity of the adductors as an objective measure of injury risk and for monitoring athletes with pubalgia or at risk of pubalgia. The results obtained suggest that only peak force is suitable for the study's purpose.
The study is well-structured and well-directed. Suggestions:
a) On page 2, lines 76/77, you could provide references to studies that suggest the importance of developing strength measurement tests.
b) On page 3, lines 118/119, it would be important to justify the warm-up protocol you proposed. Additionally, you should consider your choice in relation to its potential influence on the test itself, given that peak force values may be affected when muscle performance differs during the preparatory session. These variations could result from the warm-up rather than from strength changes related to the injury condition and/or potential fatigue.
c) In the discussion, you could address the test position itself. The position you selected and partially justified—could it be responsible for some variability in the test? Could it be challenging for some players to perform? Would it be possible to consider, in future studies, the feasibility of an alternative test position? These reflections could further enrich the content of your article.
I hope my suggestions contribute to improving your study and reflection. Great work!
Author Response
a) On page 2, lines 76/77, you could provide references to studies that suggest the importance of developing strength measurement tests.
response: were added in line 68
b) On page 3, lines 118/119, it would be important to justify the warm-up protocol you proposed. Additionally, you should consider your choice in relation to its potential influence on the test itself, given that peak force values may be affected when muscle performance differs during the preparatory session. These variations could result from the warm-up rather than from strength changes related to the injury condition and/or potential fatigue.
response: the warm-uo protocol was the same for all athletes, them the effect of it is the same for everyone.
c) In the discussion, you could address the test position itself. The position you selected and partially justified—could it be responsible for some variability in the test? Could it be challenging for some players to perform? Would it be possible to consider, in future studies, the feasibility of an alternative test position? These reflections could further enrich the content of your article.
response: the justification of position was added in methods (in red) and limitations were added (in red)
