|
|
|
|
JOURNAL
OF
SPORTS SCIENCE &
MEDICINE
|
 |
|
Research
article
|
A COMPARISON OF THE SIT-AND-REACH TEST AND THE BACK-SAVER SIT-AND-REACH TEST IN UNIVERSITY STUDENTS |
|||||||||
Pedro A. López-Miñarro1  ,
Pilar Sáinz de Baranda Andújar2 and Pedro L. Rodríguez-García1 |
|||||||||
1Department of Physical Education, University of Murcia, Murcia, Spain 2Department of Health Sciences and Sports, Catholic University of San Antonio, Murcia, Spain |
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
© Journal of Sports Science and Medicine (2009) 8, 116 - 122 Search Google Scholar for Citing Articles |
|||||||||
|
|
| ABSTRACT | |||
| This study compares the forward reach score, spine and pelvis
postures, and hamstring criterion-related validity (concurrent validity)
between the sit-and-reach test (SR) and the back-saver sit-and-reach test
(BS). Seventy-six men (mean age ± SD: 23.45 ± 3.96 years) and 67 women (mean
age ± SD: 23.85 ± 5.36 years) were asked to perform three trials of SR,
BS left (BSl), right (BSr), and passive straight leg raise (PSLR) right
and left (hamstring criterion measure) in a randomized order. The thoracic,
lumbar, and pelvis angles (measured with a Uni-level inclinometer) and forward
reach scores were recorded once the subjects reached forward as far as possible
without flexing the knees. A repeated measure ANOVA was performed followed
by Bonferroni´s post hoc test. Pearson correlation coefficients were used
to define the relationships between SR and BS scores with respect to PSLR.
In both men and women, the thoracic angle in BS was significantly greater
than in SR (p<0.016). However, no significant differences were found
between the tests in lumbar angle, pelvic angle, and forward reach scores.
The concurrent validity of the forward reach score as a measure of hamstring
extensibility was moderate in women (0.66 0. 76) and weak to moderate in
men (0.51 0.59). The concurrent validity was slightly higher in SR than
in BS, although no significant differences between the correlation values
were observed. There were significant differences in the thoracic angle
between the SR and BS, but not in the forward reach score. There was no
difference in concurrent validity between the two tests. However, the traditional
SR was preferred because it reached better concurrent validity than the
BS.
Key words: Hamstring, flexibility, measurement, spine. |
|