Refine
Document Type
- Article (3)
Language
- English (3)
Has Fulltext
- yes (3)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (3)
Keywords
- Athlete (1)
- COVID-19 (1)
- Motor-cognitive (1)
- Sport (1)
- Testing (1)
- Training (1)
- adolescents (1)
- athlete (1)
- cognition (1)
- health-related quality of life (1)
Institute
Background/Objectives: Agility and cognitive abilities are typically assessed separately by different motor and cognitive tests. While many agility tests lack a reactive decision-making component, cognitive assessments are still mainly based on computer-based or paper-pencil tests with low ecological validity. This study is the first to validate the novel SKILLCOURT technology as an integrated assessment tool for agility and cognitive-motor performance.
Methods: Thirty-two healthy adults performed agility (Star Run), reactive agility (Random Star Run) and cognitive-motor (executive function test, 1-back decision making) performance assessments on the SKILLCOURT. Cognitive-motor tests included lower limb responses in a standing position to increase the ecological validity when compared to computer-based tests. Test results were compared to established motor and agility tests (countermovement jump, 10 m linear sprint, T-agility tests) as well as computer-based cognitive assessments (choice-reaction, Go-NoGo, task switching, memory span). Correlation and multiple regression analyses quantified the relation between SKILLCOURT performance and motor and cognitive outcomes.
Results: Star Run and Random Star Run tests were best predicted by linear sprint (r = 0.68, p < 0.001) and T-agility performance (r = 0.77, p < 0.001), respectively. The executive function test performance was well explained by computer-based assessments on choice reaction speed and cognitive flexibility (r = 0.64, p < 0.001). The 1-back test on the SKILLCOURT revealed moderate but significant correlations with the computer-based assessments (r = 0.47, p = 0.007).
Conclusion: The results support the validity of the SKILLCOURT technology for agility and cognitive assessments in more ecologically valid cognitive-motor tasks. This technology provides a promising alternative to existing performance assessment tools.
Agility, as the ability to react rapidly to unforeseen events, is an essential component of football performance. However, existing agility diagnostics often do not reflect the complex motor–cognitive interaction required on the field. Therefore, this study evaluates the criterion and ecological validity of a newly developed motor–cognitive dual-task agility approach in elite youth football players and compare it to a traditional reactive agility test. Twenty-one male youth elite football players (age:17.4 ±0 .6; BMI:23.2 ± 1.8) performed two agility tests (reactive agility, reactive agility with integrated multiple-object-tracking (Dual-Task Agility)) on the SKILLCOURT system. Performance was correlated to motor (sprint, jump), cognitive (executive functions, attention, reaction speed) and football specific tests (Loughborough soccer passing test (LSPT)) as well as indirect game metrics (coaches' rating, playing time). Reactive agility performance showed moderate correlations to attention and choice reaction times (r = 0.48−0.63), as well as to the LSPT (r = 0.51). The dual-task agility test revealed moderate relationships with attention and reaction speed (r = 0.47−0.58), executive functions (r = 0.45−0.63), as well as the game metrics (r = 0.51−0.61). Finally, the dual-task agility test significantly differentiated players based on their coaches' rating and playing time using a median split (p < 0.05; d = 0.8–1.28). Motor–cognitive agility performance in elite youth football players seems to be primarily determined by cognitive functions. The integration of multiple object tracking into reactive agility testing seems to be an ecologically valid approach for performance diagnostics in youth football.
Highlights
* The study introduces a novel motor–cognitive dual-task agility approach (incorporation of multiple-object-tracking in agility testing), evaluating its criterion and ecological validity in elite youth football players compared to a standard agility test.
* The standard agility test was shown to have moderate correlations with attention and choice reaction times, while the dual-task agility approach additionally incorporates executive functions
* While the agility test correlates to football-specific test performance, the dual-task agility test significantly discriminates players based on their potential ratings and in-season playing time, highlighting its potential as a valuable tool for assessing performance in youth football.
* The findings suggest that agility performance in elite youth football is primarily determined by cognitive functions
* Incorporating more complex cognitive elements such as multiple-object-tracking in agility testing may improve ecological validity and therefore the predictive value of the testing procedure.
Background: In March 2020, the COVID-19 outbreak led to the declaration of a pandemic. The accompanying restrictions on public life caused a change in the training routines of athletes worldwide. The present study aimed to investigate the effects of a 13-week supervised home training program on physical performance, sleep quality, and health-related quality of life in professional youth soccer players during the first COVID-19 lockdown in Germany.
Methods: Eight professional soccer players (age range 16–19; height: 1.81 ± 0.07 m; body weight: 72.05 ± 6.96 kg) from a Bundesliga team in Germany participated in this study. During the lockdown, they trained 5–6 days per week with home-based training plans and were monitored via tracking apps and video training. To determine the effects of home training, measurements were taken before (March 2020) and after (June 2020) the home training period. Bioelectrical impedance analysis was used to determine body composition, and an isokinetic strength test and a treadmill step test, including lactate measurements, were used to measure physical performance. Two questionnaires were responded to in order to assess health-related quality of life [Short-Form 36 Health Survey (SF-36)] and sleep quality (Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index).
Results: When comparing measurements before and after the home training period, we observed significant increases in the following variables: body weight (72.05 ± 6.96 kg vs. 73.50 ± 6.68 kg, p = 0.034), fat mass (11.99 ± 3.13 % vs. 13.98 ± 3.92 %, p = 0.030), body mass index (22.04 ± 0.85 kg/m2 vs. 22.49 ± 0.92 kg/m2, p = 0.049), and mental health component summary score (MCS) of the questionnaire SF-36 (53.95 ± 3.47 vs. 58.33 ± 4.50, p = 0.044). Scores on the general health (77.88 ± 14.56 vs. 89.75 ± 13.76, p = 0.025) and mental health (81.50 ± 9.30 vs. 90.00 ± 11.71, p = 0.018) subscales of the SF-36 also increased significantly.
Conclusion: The COVID-19 lockdown led to an increase in body composition parameters and showed an improvement in the MCS and scores on the general and mental health subscales of the SF-36. Physical performance and sleep quality could be maintained during the home training period. These observations may help trainers for future training planning during longer interruptions in soccer training.