Comparison between sit-and-reach test and V sit-and-reach test in young adults

Gazzetta Medica Italiana Archivio per le Scienze Mediche

Volumn 167, Issue 4, 2008, Pages 135-142

  Lopez Minarro P A ^a,c   Sainz De Baranda P ^b   Rodriguez Garcia P L ^a   Yuste, J L ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MURCIA   (Spain)

^b CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF MURCIA   (Spain)

^c UNIVERSITY OF MURCIA   (Spain)

Author keywords

Lumbar spine; Pelvis; Posture; Sit and reach tests; Thoracic spine

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; BODY POSTURE; CONTROLLED STUDY; CRITERION RELATED VALIDITY; FEMALE; FITNESS; FUNCTION TEST; HAMSTRING; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; LEG MOVEMENT; LUMBAR SPINE; MALE; PHYSICAL ACTIVITY; SCORING SYSTEM; SIT AND REACH TEST; SPINE MOBILITY; TASK PERFORMANCE; THORACIC SPINE; V SIT AND REACH TEST; VISUAL ANALOG SCALE;

EID: 49149085341     PISSN: 03933660     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Liemohn W, Sharpe GL, Wasserman JF. Criterion related validity of the sit-and-reach test. J Strength Cond Res 1994;8:91-4.
2. Patterson P, Wiksten DL, Ray L, Flanders C, Sanphy D. The validity and reliability of the back saver sit-and-reach in middle school girls and boys. Res Q Exerc Sport 1996;67:448-51.
3. Jones CJ, Rikli RE, Max J, Noffal G. The reliability and validity of a chair sit-and-reach test as a measure of hamstring flexibility in older adults. Res Q Exerc Sport 1998:69:338-43.
4. Hui SC, Yuen PY, Morrow JR, Jackson AW. Comparison of the criterion-related validity of sit-and-reach tests with and without limb length adjustment in Asian adults. Res Q Exerc Sport 1999;70:401-6.
5. Chung P, Yuen C. Criterion-related validity of sit-and-reach tests in university men in Hong Kong. Percept Mot Skills 1999;88:304-16.
6. Hui SC, Yuen PY Validity of the modified back-saver sit-and-reach test: a comparison with other protocols. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2000;32:1655-9.
7. Perret C, Poiraudeau, S, Fermanian J, Colau MM, Benhamou MA, Revel M. Validity, reliability, and responsiveness of the fingertip-to-floor test. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2001;82:1566-70.
8. Baltaci G, Un N, Tunay V, Besler A, Gerceker S. Comparison of three different sit and reach tests for measurement of hamstring flexibility in women university students. Br J Sports Med 2003;37:59-61.
9. Simoneau GG. The impact of various anthropometric and flexibility measurements on the sit-and-reach test. J Strength Cond Res 1998;12:232-7.
10. Yuen PY, Hui SC. Are difference scores a better predictor of flexibility than end scores in sit-and-reach tests?. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1998;30(Suppl 5):125.
11. Cornbleet SL, Woolsey NB. Assessment of hamstring muscle length in school-aged children using the sit-and-reach test and the inclinometer measure of hip joint angle. Phys Ther 1996;76:850-5.
12. Liemohn WP, Sharpe GL, Wasserman JF. Lumbosacral movement in the sit-and-reach and in Cailliet's protective-hamstring stretch. Spine 1994;19:2127-30.
13. Tully EA, Stillman BC. Computer-aided video analysis of vertebrofemoral motion during toe touching in healthy subjects. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1997;78:759-66.
14. Gajdosik RL, Albert CR, Mitman JJ. Influence of hamstring length on the standing position and flexion range of motion of the pelvis angle, lumbar angle and thoracic angle. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 1994;20:213-9.
15. Gajdosik RL, LeVeau BF, Bohannon RW. Effects of ankle dorsiflexion on active and passive unilateral straight-leg-raising. Phys Ther 1985;65:1478-82.
16. Boland RA, Adams RD. Effects of ankle dorsiflexion on range and reliability of straight leg raising. Aust J Physiother 2000;46:191-200.
17. Liemohn W, Martin SB, Pariser GL. The effect of ankle posture on sit-and-reach test performance. J Strength Cond Res 1997;11:239-41.
18. Minkler S, Patterson P. The validity of the modified sit-and-reach test in college-age students. Res Q Exerc Sport 1994;65:189-92.