Advances in Sprint Acceleration Profiling for Field-Based Team-Sport Athletes: Utility, Reliability, Validity and Limitations
- 1.2k Downloads
Advanced testing technologies enable insight into the kinematic and kinetic determinants of sprint acceleration performance, which is particularly important for field-based team-sport athletes. Establishing the reliability and validity of the data, particularly from the acceleration phase, is important for determining the utility of the respective technologies.
The aim of this systematic review was to explain the utility, reliability, validity and limitations of (1) radar and laser technology, and (2) non-motorised treadmill (NMT) and torque treadmill (TT) technology for providing kinematic and kinetic measures of sprint acceleration performance.
A comprehensive search of the CINAHL Plus, MEDLINE (EBSCO), PubMed, SPORTDiscus, and Web of Science databases was conducted using search terms that included radar, laser, non-motorised treadmill, torque treadmill, sprint, acceleration, kinetic, kinematic, force, and power.
Studies examining the kinematics or kinetics of short (≤10 s), maximal-effort sprint acceleration in adults or children, which included an assessment of reliability or validity of the advanced technologies of interest, were included in this systematic review. Absolute reliability, relative reliability and validity data were extracted from the selected articles and tabulated. The level of acceptance of reliability was a coefficient of variation (CV) ≤10 % and an intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) or correlation coefficient (r) ≥0.70.
A total of 34 studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the qualitative analysis. Generally acceptable validity (r = 0.87–0.99; absolute bias 3–7 %), intraday reliability (CV ≤9.5 %; ICC/r ≥0.84) and interday reliability (ICC ≥0.72) were reported for data from radar and laser. However, low intraday reliability was reported for the theoretical maximum horizontal force (ICC 0.64) within adolescent athletes, and low validity was reported for velocity during the initial 5 m of a sprint acceleration (bias up to 0.41 m/s) measured with a laser device. Acceptable reliability of results from NMT and TT was only ensured when testing protocols involved sufficient familiarisation, a high sampling rate (≥200 Hz), a ‘blocked’ start position, and the analysis of discrete steps rather than arbitrary time periods. Sprinting times and speeds were 20–28 % slower on a TT, 28–67 % slower on an NMT, and only 9–64 % of the variance in overground measurements of speed and time (≤30 m) was explained by results from an NMT. There have been no reports to date of criterion validity of kinetic measures of sprint acceleration performance on NMT andTT, and only limited results regarding acceptable concurrent validity of radar-derived kinetic data.
Radar, laser, NMT and TT technologies can be used to reliably measure sprint acceleration performance and to provide insight into the determinants of sprinting speed. However, further research is required to establish the validity of the kinetic measurements made with NMT and TT. Radar and laser technology may not be suitable for measuring the first few steps of a sprint acceleration.
KeywordsIntraclass Correlation Coefficient Sprint Performance Split Time Relative Reliability Absolute Bias
Compliance with Ethical Standards
No funding was received directly for this review. Kim Simperingham was funded by an Auckland University of Technology Vice Chancellor’s doctoral scholarship. This review contributes to his PhD qualification.
Conflicts of interest
Kim Simperingham, John Cronin and Angus Ross declare that they have no conflicts of interest relevant to the content of this review.
- 22.Samozino P, Rabita G, Dorel S, et al. A simple method for measuring power, force, velocity properties, and mechanical effectiveness in sprint running. Scand J Med Sci Sports (Epub 21 May 2015).Google Scholar
- 35.Atkinson G, Nevill AM. Statistical methods for assessing measurement error (reliability) in variables relevant to sports medicine. [Methodes statistiques pour evaluer le taux d ‘ erreur (la fiabilite) des variables ayant rapport a la medecine du sport]. Sports Med. 1998;26(4):217–38.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 36.Nunnally JC. Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1978.Google Scholar
- 37.Streiner DL, Norman GR. Health measurement scales: a practical guide to their development and use. 4th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2008.Google Scholar
- 38.Vincent WJ. Statistics in kinesiology. 3rd ed. Champaign: Human Kinetics; 2005.Google Scholar
- 41.Ferro A, Floría P, Villacieros J, et al. Validez y fiabilidad del sensor láser del sistema BioLaserSport® para el análisis de la velocidad de la carrera. [Validity and reliability of the laser sensor of BioLaserSport® system for the analysis of the running velocity]. Rev Int Cienc Deporte. 2012;8(30):357–70.Google Scholar
- 44.Stalker ATS II Professional Sports Radar: owner’s manual. Stalker Radar; 2010.Google Scholar
- 59.Rumpf MC. Sprint running kinetics and kinematics in youth [unpublished doctoral thesis]. Auckland: Auckland University of Technology; 2012.Google Scholar
- 67.Winter EM, Jones AM, Davidson RCR, et al. Sport and exercise physiology testing guidelines. Oxon: Routledge; 2007.Google Scholar
- 68.Samozino P, Morin J-B, Dorel S, et al. A simple method for measuring power, force and velocity properties of sprint running. XXIV Congress of the International Society of Biomechanics. 4–9 Aug 2013; Brazil.Google Scholar
- 69.Mann RV. The mechanics of sprinting and hurdling. USA: Createspace; 2011.Google Scholar
- 75.Draper JA, Lancaster MG. The 505 test: a test for agility in the horizontal plane. Aust J Sci Med Sport. 1985;17(1):15–8.Google Scholar