We hypothesized that the reliability of 1RM testing would not be different between large muscles and small muscles, upper body muscles and lower body muscles and also would not be different between men and women in healthy subjects. Possible factors that may affect reliability are gender and/or muscle group location, therefore, the main purpose of this study was to determine the reliability of the 1RM strength test in healthy men and women for the influence of muscle group location and gender. Major exercises such as the bench press and squat have been shown to be reliable measurements for 1RM testing (Flansbjer and Lexell, 2010 Levinger et al., 2009 McCurdy et al., 2004 Nevill and Atkinson, 1997 Tagesson and Kvist, 2007), but it is unclear if acceptable test-retest reliability exists for other less used muscle groups. Due to the wide use of 1RM testing, it is important for the 1 RM to be a reliable measurement. Previous studies have suggested that the 1RM testing to assess muscle strength is safe for participants (Featherstone et al., 1993 Ghilarducci et al., 1989 Gordon et al., 1995 Shaw et al., 1995). The 1RM testing is useful used by athletic trainers, health and fitness professionals and rehabilitation specialists to quantify the level of strength, assess strength imbalances, and to evaluate training programs (Braith et al., 1993).
![reliability workbench training reliability workbench training](https://slidetodoc.com/presentation_image/ed187a0f09fd10ea7931d60530035225/image-11.jpg)
It is defined as the maximal weight that can be lifted once with correct lifting technique, is comparatively simple and requires relatively inexpensive non-laboratory equipment (Kraemer et al., 2006). The one repetition maximum (1RM) test is considered the gold standard for assessing muscle strength in non-laboratory situations (Levinger et al., 2009). In conclusion, a standardized 1RM testing protocol with a short warm-up and familiarization period is a reliable measurement to assess muscle strength changes regardless of muscle group location or gender. A high intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC > 0.91) was found for all exercises, independent of gender and muscle group size or location, however there was a significant interaction for muscle group location (upper body vs.
![reliability workbench training reliability workbench training](https://d1.awsstatic.com/ServiceWorkbench_Impact-on-Research-IT.3b27d5869f52e7a57e1bbd84f2f507ca5c1fd506.png)
All four visits to the laboratory were at the same time of day. The third and fourth visits were separated by 48 hours as well.
![reliability workbench training reliability workbench training](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/71CiS2IgQNL._AC_US800_.jpg)
One week from the second visit, participants completed the 1 RM testing as previously done during the first and second visits. During their second visit, 1RM of triceps extension, shoulder press, low row, leg extension, hip extension, and leg press were measured. Biceps curl, lat pull down, bench press, leg curl, hip flexion, and squat 1RM's were measured on the first visit, then 48 hours later, subjects returned for their second visit.
RELIABILITY WORKBENCH TRAINING PROFESSIONAL
The 1RM for the biceps curl, lat pull down, bench press, leg curl, hip flexion, triceps extension, shoulder press, low row, leg extension, hip extension, leg press and squat were measured twice by a trained professional using a standard published protocol. Thirty healthy males (n = 15) and females (n = 15) who experienced at least 3 months of continuous resistance training during the last 2 years aged 18-35 years volunteered to participate in the study. The purpose of the present study was to examine the influence of muscle group location and gender on the reliability of assessing the one-repetition maximum (1RM) test.