J Naylor1, M Greig. 1. Sports Injuries Research Group, Department of Sport and Physical Activity, Edge Hill University, Ormskirk, UK - matt.greig@edgehill.ac.uk.
Abstract
AIM: The aim of this study was to investigate the hierarchical contributions of anthropometry, strength and cognition to a battery of prescriptive and reactive agility tests. METHODS: Nineteen participants (mean±S.D.; age:22.1±1.9 years; height: 182.9±5.5 cm; body mass: 77±4.9 kg) completed four agility tests: a prescriptive linear sprint, a prescriptive change-of-direction sprint, a reactive change-of-direction sprint, and a reactive linear deceleration test. Anthropometric variables included body fat percentage and thigh girth. Strength was quantified as the peak eccentric hamstring torque at 180, 300, and 60°·s-1. Mean reaction time and accuracy in the Stroop word-colour Test was used to assess perceptual and decision making factors. RESULTS: There was little evidence of intertest correlation with the strongest relationship observed between 10 m sprint and t-test performance (r2=0.49, P<0.01). Anthropometric measures were not strong predictors of agility, accounting for a maximum 23% (P=0.12) in the prescriptive change-of-direction test. Cognitive measures had a stronger correlation with the reactive (rather than prescriptive) agility tests, with a maximum 33% (P=0.04) of variance accounted for in the reactive change-of-direction test. Eccentric hamstring strength accounted for 62% (P=0.01) of the variance in the prescriptive change-of-direction test. Hierarchical ordering of the agility tests revealed that eccentric hamstring strength was the primary predictor in 3 of the 4 tests, with cognitive accuracy the next most common predictor. CONCLUSION: There is little evidence of inter-test correlation across a battery of agility tests. Eccentric hamstring strength and decision making accuracy are the most common predictors of agility performance.
AIM: The aim of this study was to investigate the hierarchical contributions of anthropometry, strength and cognition to a battery of prescriptive and reactive agility tests. METHODS: Nineteen participants (mean±S.D.; age:22.1±1.9 years; height: 182.9±5.5 cm; body mass: 77±4.9 kg) completed four agility tests: a prescriptive linear sprint, a prescriptive change-of-direction sprint, a reactive change-of-direction sprint, and a reactive linear deceleration test. Anthropometric variables included body fat percentage and thigh girth. Strength was quantified as the peak eccentric hamstring torque at 180, 300, and 60°·s-1. Mean reaction time and accuracy in the Stroop word-colour Test was used to assess perceptual and decision making factors. RESULTS: There was little evidence of intertest correlation with the strongest relationship observed between 10 m sprint and t-test performance (r2=0.49, P<0.01). Anthropometric measures were not strong predictors of agility, accounting for a maximum 23% (P=0.12) in the prescriptive change-of-direction test. Cognitive measures had a stronger correlation with the reactive (rather than prescriptive) agility tests, with a maximum 33% (P=0.04) of variance accounted for in the reactive change-of-direction test. Eccentric hamstring strength accounted for 62% (P=0.01) of the variance in the prescriptive change-of-direction test. Hierarchical ordering of the agility tests revealed that eccentric hamstring strength was the primary predictor in 3 of the 4 tests, with cognitive accuracy the next most common predictor. CONCLUSION: There is little evidence of inter-test correlation across a battery of agility tests. Eccentric hamstring strength and decision making accuracy are the most common predictors of agility performance.
Authors: Helmi Chaabene; Adrian Markov; Olaf Prieske; Jason Moran; Martin Behrens; Yassine Negra; Rodrigo Ramirez-Campillo; Ulrike Koch; Bessem Mkaouer Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-06-09 Impact factor: 4.614
Authors: Jaroslaw Kabacinski; Piotr M Szozda; Krzysztof Mackala; Michal Murawa; Agata Rzepnicka; Piotr Szewczyk; Lechoslaw B Dworak Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-01-07 Impact factor: 3.390