Limits...
The Functional Test for Agility Performance is a Reliable Quick Decision-Making Test for Skilled Water Polo Players.

Tucher G, de Souza Castro FA, da Silva AJ, Garrido ND - J Hum Kinet (2015)

Bottom Line: Athletes completed the Functional Test for Agility Performance in 4.15 0.47 s.The ICC value was 0.87 (95% IC = 0.80-0.92).The SEM varied between 0.24 and 0.38 s.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: University of Trás-os-Montes and Alto Douro, Vila Real, Portugal. Research Centre in Sports Sciences, Health Sciences and Human Development, CIDESD, Portugal.

ABSTRACT
The reliability of the Functional Test for Agility Performance has only been evaluated in water polo players in a small group of novice athletes. Thus, the aim of this study was to evaluate the reliability of the Functional Test for Agility Performance in skilled water polo players. Forty-two athletes (17.81 ± 3.24 years old) with a minimum of 5 years of competitive experience (7.05 ± 2.84 years) and playing at the national or international level were evaluated. The Functional Test for Agility Performance is characterized as a specific open decision-making test where a tested player moves as quickly as possible in accordance to a pass made by another player. The time spent in the test was measured by two experienced coaches. Descriptive statistics, repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA), 95% limit of agreement (LOA), intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and standard error of measurements (SEM) were used for data analysis. Athletes completed the Functional Test for Agility Performance in 4.15 0.47 s. The ICC value was 0.87 (95% IC = 0.80-0.92). The SEM varied between 0.24 and 0.38 s. The LOA was 1.20 s and the CV average considering each individual trial was 6%. The Functional Test for Agility Performance was shown to be a reliable quick decision-making test for skilled water polo players.

No MeSH data available.


FTAP performance time: difference of time (evaluator A minus evaluator B) versus average time measured by evaluators A and B with the 95% limit of agreement (SD = standard deviation).
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4519206&req=5

f1-jhk-46-157: FTAP performance time: difference of time (evaluator A minus evaluator B) versus average time measured by evaluators A and B with the 95% limit of agreement (SD = standard deviation).

Mentions: The mean difference between evaluator A and evaluator B was − 0.04 ± 0.31 s. The difference presented a normal distribution (p = 0.16). Therefore, it could be expected that, in 95% of the cases, the difference between measurements registered by the evaluators would be between −0.64 s and 0.56 s (range of 1.20 s), which characterizes the 95% limit of agreement (LOA) (Figure 1). These values represent an amplitude for the value obtained of 1.20 s (Bland and Altman, 1999). The ICC was 0.87 (95% IC = 0.80–0.92) for p < 0.01. The SEM found for the trial effect was 0.35 s, for the evaluator was 0.38 s and for the interaction trial-evaluator was 0.24 s.


The Functional Test for Agility Performance is a Reliable Quick Decision-Making Test for Skilled Water Polo Players.

Tucher G, de Souza Castro FA, da Silva AJ, Garrido ND - J Hum Kinet (2015)

FTAP performance time: difference of time (evaluator A minus evaluator B) versus average time measured by evaluators A and B with the 95% limit of agreement (SD = standard deviation).
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4519206&req=5

f1-jhk-46-157: FTAP performance time: difference of time (evaluator A minus evaluator B) versus average time measured by evaluators A and B with the 95% limit of agreement (SD = standard deviation).
Mentions: The mean difference between evaluator A and evaluator B was − 0.04 ± 0.31 s. The difference presented a normal distribution (p = 0.16). Therefore, it could be expected that, in 95% of the cases, the difference between measurements registered by the evaluators would be between −0.64 s and 0.56 s (range of 1.20 s), which characterizes the 95% limit of agreement (LOA) (Figure 1). These values represent an amplitude for the value obtained of 1.20 s (Bland and Altman, 1999). The ICC was 0.87 (95% IC = 0.80–0.92) for p < 0.01. The SEM found for the trial effect was 0.35 s, for the evaluator was 0.38 s and for the interaction trial-evaluator was 0.24 s.

Bottom Line: Athletes completed the Functional Test for Agility Performance in 4.15 0.47 s.The ICC value was 0.87 (95% IC = 0.80-0.92).The SEM varied between 0.24 and 0.38 s.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: University of Trás-os-Montes and Alto Douro, Vila Real, Portugal. Research Centre in Sports Sciences, Health Sciences and Human Development, CIDESD, Portugal.

ABSTRACT
The reliability of the Functional Test for Agility Performance has only been evaluated in water polo players in a small group of novice athletes. Thus, the aim of this study was to evaluate the reliability of the Functional Test for Agility Performance in skilled water polo players. Forty-two athletes (17.81 ± 3.24 years old) with a minimum of 5 years of competitive experience (7.05 ± 2.84 years) and playing at the national or international level were evaluated. The Functional Test for Agility Performance is characterized as a specific open decision-making test where a tested player moves as quickly as possible in accordance to a pass made by another player. The time spent in the test was measured by two experienced coaches. Descriptive statistics, repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA), 95% limit of agreement (LOA), intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and standard error of measurements (SEM) were used for data analysis. Athletes completed the Functional Test for Agility Performance in 4.15 0.47 s. The ICC value was 0.87 (95% IC = 0.80-0.92). The SEM varied between 0.24 and 0.38 s. The LOA was 1.20 s and the CV average considering each individual trial was 6%. The Functional Test for Agility Performance was shown to be a reliable quick decision-making test for skilled water polo players.

No MeSH data available.