The aim of this study was to examine the concurrent validity and reliability of a functional electromechanical dynamometer (FEMD) to assess the isometric mid-thigh pull (IMTP) kinetic variables: peak force (PF), rate of force development (RFD), and time-specific force values (50-, 100-, 150-, and 200-ms). Twenty-seven male collegiate athletes (age: 22.9 ± 1.9 years; stature: 184.8 ± 10.4 cm; body mass: 84.2 ± 11.8 kg) performed four IMTP trials simultaneously on a force platform and the FEMD. The PF variables calculated from performance of the IMTP on both devices were reliable (CV < 3%; ICC > 0.90) and valid (bias < 13.9 N; random error < 52.1 N; r = 1.00), but they showed heteroscedasticity of the errors (R² > 0.23). The RFD (CV > 10.88%; ICC < 0.76) and initial force (CV > 8.81%; ICC < 0.76) variables did not reach an acceptable reliability for any device, but they showed strong associations between them (r range = 0.53–0.69). These results indicate that the FEMD is an acceptable alternative to assess athlete’s maximal force production (i.e. PF), but the data collected with FEMD and force plates should not be used interchangeably.

本研究的目的是检查功能机电测功机 (FEMD) 的同时有效性和可靠性，以评估等长大腿中部拉力 (IMTP) 动力学变量：峰值力 (PF)、力发展率 (RFD) 和特定时间的力值（50-、100-、150- 和 200-ms）。27 名大学男运动员（年龄：22.9 ± 1.9 岁；身高：184.8 ± 10.4 cm；体重：84.2 ± 11.8 kg）在力平台和 FEMD 上同时进行了四次 IMTP 试验。根据两种设备上 IMTP 的性能计算的 PF 变量是可靠的（CV < 3%；ICC > 0.90）且有效（偏差 < 13.9 N；随机误差 < 52.1 N；r  = 1.00），但它们显示了误差的异方差性( R ² > 0.23)。RFD（CV > 10.88%；ICC < 0.76）和初始力（CV > 8.81%；ICC < 0.76）变量没有达到任何设备可接受的可靠性，但它们之间显示出很强的关联（r范围 = 0.53–0.69 ）。这些结果表明，FEMD 是评估运动员最大力量产生（即 PF）的可接受替代方案，但使用 FEMD 和测力台收集的数据不应互换使用。