Findings

For the Vmaxpro, significant fixed and proportional bias were found for peak velocity. However, this bias was within the SESOI limits, suggesting the bias is practically negligible. The SDC for mean velocity was 0.044 m/s, which was within the SESOI limits, and the SDC as a percentage of 1RM (3.61%) was below the 5% threshold. In contrast, the SDC for peak velocity was 0.11 m/s, which exceeded the SESOI limits, resulting in an SDC%1RM of 6.91%, above the 5% threshold. This indicates that while Vmaxpro showed excellent precision for MV, it had slightly greater variability for PV.

Download publication

Abstract

This study examined the reproducibility of GymAware, PUSH2 and Vmaxpro velocity monitoring devices during resistance training (RT). The sensitivity of these devices to detect the smallest changes in velocity that correspond to true changes in RT performance was also investigated. Fifty-one resistance-trained men and women performed an incremental loading (1RM) test, and two repetitions to failure tests with different loads, 72 h apart. During all repetitions, mean velocity (MV) and peak velocity (PV) were simultaneously recorded by two devices of each brand. Overall, GymAware was the most reliable and sensitive device for detecting the smallest changes in RT performance, regardless of the velocity metric used. Vmaxpro can be considered as an equivalent, cheaper alternative to GymAware for RT monitoring and prescription, but only if the MV metric is used. Caution should be exercised when using PUSH2 in practice due to their comparatively higher, unacceptable measurement error and generally low sensitivity to detect changes in RT performance. Collectively, these findings support the use of MV and PV from GymAware and MV from Vmaxpro devices for RT monitoring and prescription due to their low magnitudes of error; thus, allowing for the detection of meaningful changes in neuromuscular status and functional performance during RT.