PURPOSE: To compare the criterion validity and accuracy of a 1 Hz non-differential global positioning system (GPS) and data logger device (DL) for the measurement of wheelchair tennis court movement variables. METHODS: Initial validation of the DL device was performed. GPS and DL were fitted to the wheelchair and used to record distance (m) and speed (m/second) during (a) tennis field (b) linear track, and (c) match-play test scenarios. Fifteen participants were monitored at the Wheelchair British Tennis Open. RESULTS: Data logging validation showed underestimations for distance in right (DLR) and left (DLL) logging devices at speeds >2.5 m/second. In tennis-field tests, GPS underestimated distance in five drills. DLL was lower than both (a) criterion and (b) DLR in drills moving forward. Reversing drill direction showed that DLR was lower than (a) criterion and (b) DLL. GPS values for distance and average speed for match play were significantly lower than equivalent values obtained by DL (distance: 2816 (844) vs. 3952 (1109) m, P = 0.0001; average speed: 0.7 (0.2) vs. 1.0 (0.2) m/second, P = 0.0001). Higher peak speeds were observed in DL (3.4 (0.4) vs. 3.1 (0.5) m/second, P = 0.004) during tennis match play. CONCLUSIONS: Sampling frequencies of 1 Hz are too low to accurately measure distance and speed during wheelchair tennis. GPS units with a higher sampling rate should be advocated in further studies. Modifications to existing DL devices may be required to increase measurement precision. Further research into the validity of movement devices during match play will further inform the demands and movement patterns associated with wheelchair tennis.
PURPOSE: To compare the criterion validity and accuracy of a 1 Hz non-differential global positioning system (GPS) and data logger device (DL) for the measurement of wheelchair tennis court movement variables. METHODS: Initial validation of the DL device was performed. GPS and DL were fitted to the wheelchair and used to record distance (m) and speed (m/second) during (a) tennis field (b) linear track, and (c) match-play test scenarios. Fifteen participants were monitored at the Wheelchair British Tennis Open. RESULTS: Data logging validation showed underestimations for distance in right (DLR) and left (DLL) logging devices at speeds >2.5 m/second. In tennis-field tests, GPS underestimated distance in five drills. DLL was lower than both (a) criterion and (b) DLR in drills moving forward. Reversing drill direction showed that DLR was lower than (a) criterion and (b) DLL. GPS values for distance and average speed for match play were significantly lower than equivalent values obtained by DL (distance: 2816 (844) vs. 3952 (1109) m, P = 0.0001; average speed: 0.7 (0.2) vs. 1.0 (0.2) m/second, P = 0.0001). Higher peak speeds were observed in DL (3.4 (0.4) vs. 3.1 (0.5) m/second, P = 0.004) during tennis match play. CONCLUSIONS: Sampling frequencies of 1 Hz are too low to accurately measure distance and speed during wheelchair tennis. GPS units with a higher sampling rate should be advocated in further studies. Modifications to existing DL devices may be required to increase measurement precision. Further research into the validity of movement devices during match play will further inform the demands and movement patterns associated with wheelchair tennis.
Authors: Jaime Fernandez-Fernandez; Alberto Mendez-Villanueva; Benjamin Fernandez-Garcia; Nicolas Terrados Journal: Br J Sports Med Date: 2007-06-11 Impact factor: 13.800
Authors: José C Barbero-Alvarez; Aaron Coutts; Juan Granda; Verónica Barbero-Alvarez; Carlo Castagna Journal: J Sci Med Sport Date: 2009-05-14 Impact factor: 4.319
Authors: Michelle L Sporner; Garrett G Grindle; Annmarie Kelleher; Emily E Teodorski; Rosemarie Cooper; Rory A Cooper Journal: Prosthet Orthot Int Date: 2009-09 Impact factor: 1.895
Authors: Paul Sindall; John P Lenton; Keith Tolfrey; Rory A Cooper; Michelle Oyster; Victoria L Goosey-Tolfrey Journal: Int J Sports Physiol Perform Date: 2012-08-01 Impact factor: 4.010
Authors: G Smekal; S P von Duvillard; C Rihacek; R Pokan; P Hofmann; R Baron; H Tschan; N Bachl Journal: Med Sci Sports Exerc Date: 2001-06 Impact factor: 5.411
Authors: François Routhier; Josiane Lettre; William C Miller; Jaimie F Borisoff; Kate Keetch; Ian M Mitchell; CanWheel Research Team Journal: Assist Technol Date: 2017-01-04
Authors: Rienk M A van der Slikke; Monique A M Berger; Daan J J Bregman; Dirkjan H E J Veeger Journal: Sensors (Basel) Date: 2020-06-21 Impact factor: 3.576
Authors: Lorenzo Rum; Oscar Sten; Eleonora Vendrame; Valeria Belluscio; Valentina Camomilla; Giuseppe Vannozzi; Luigi Truppa; Marco Notarantonio; Tommaso Sciarra; Aldo Lazich; Andrea Mannini; Elena Bergamini Journal: Sensors (Basel) Date: 2021-03-07 Impact factor: 3.576
Authors: Adam Loveday; Lauren B Sherar; James P Sanders; Paul W Sanderson; Dale W Esliger Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2015-08-05 Impact factor: 5.428