طراحی آزمون جدید ظرفیت بی‌هوازی ویژة بسکتبال (BSACT) بر مبنای آزمون وینگیت 30 ثانیه پایین‌تنه

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

گروه فیزیولوژی ورزشی، دانشکدة علوم ورزشی، دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد، مشهد، ایران

چکیده

زمینه و هدف: ظرفیت و توان بی‌هوازی در اجرای الگوهای حرکتی ویژه و پاسخ به نیازمندی‌های فیزیولوژیکی بازیکنان در مسابقة بسکتبال، اهمیت زیادی دارد. آزمون‌های متعدد آزمایشگاهی برای تعیین این قابلیت وجود دارند، اما به‌نظر می‌رسد آزمون‌های میدانی کاربرد بیشتری داشته باشند. هدف پژوهش حاضر، طراحی و اعتباریابی آزمون ظرفیت بی‌هوازی ویژة بسکتبال (BSACT) بر مبنای آزمون وینگیت 30 ثانیه پایین‌تنه بود.
مواد و روش‌ها: در این پژوهش کاربردی به روش همبستگی، آزمودنی‌ها شامل 30 نفر از بازیکنان جوان نیمه‌حرفه‌ای بسکتبال (سن00/1±17/17 سال، شاخص تودة بدنی 10/2±61/22 کیلوگرم بر متر مربع) بودند. ابتدا آزمون جدید بر پایة پیشینۀ پژوهش و نظرهای مربیان متخصص و باتجربۀ بسکتبال، با استفاده از نیازمندی‌های فیزیولوژیکی و الگوهای حرکتی ویژۀ بسکتبال، از جمله حرکات رو به جلو، عقب و به پهلو، شوت، لی‌آپ، دریبل، تغییر جهت و شتاب‌گیری، به تناسب تکرار و شدت رخداد در مسابقۀ واقعی طراحی و سپس چندین بار به‌صورت آزمایشی اجرا شد. سپس از آزمودنی‌ها طی چهار روز با فاصلۀ 72 ساعت، آزمون‌های وینگیت 30 ثانیه (ملاک) و BSACT (پیش‌بین)، گرفته شد. به‌طوری‌که روز اول آزمون ملاک، روزهای دوم و سوم آزمون پیش‌بین توسط آزمون‌گیرندة اول و روز چهارم آزمون پیش‌بین توسط آزمون‌گیرندة دوم اجرا شد. توان اوج، توان میانگین، توان کمینه و نمایة خستگی آزمون وینگیت با نرم‌افزار دوچرخة کارسنج مونارک و در آزمون جدید با استفاده از کرنومتر زمان‌گیری و با فرمول‌های توان بی‌هوازی آزمون رست، محاسبه شد. ضربان قلب در هر دو آزمون با دستگاه ضربان‌سنج پولار ثبت شد. پس از اطمینان از نرمال بودن توزیع داده‌ها با استفاده از آزمون شاپیرو-ویلک، از ضریب همبستگی پیرسون به‌منظور تعیین روایی و از ضریب همسانی درونی و نمودار بلاند-آلتمن برای تعیین پایایی و عینیت آزمون جدید استفاده شد. تجزیه‌وتحلیل آماری و رسم نمودارها با استفاده از نرم‌افزارهای SPSS نسخة 27 و گراف‌پد نسخۀ 10 و در سطح معناداری آماری 05/0≥ Pانجام شد.
نتایج: نتایج نشان داد که در بررسی روایی، بین توان اوج (811/0=r)، توان میانگین (828/0=r) و توان کمینه (758/0=r) دو آزمون همبستگی بسیار قوی معنادار و در ضربان قلب (623/0=r)، همبستگی قوی معناداری وجود دارد (0/001 p<)، اما در نمایة خستگی (469/0=r ، 009/0P=) همبستگی معنادار متوسطی دیده شد. در بررسی پایایی، بین توان اوج (960/0=ICC)، توان میانگین (981/0=ICC)، توان کمینه (984/0=ICC)، نمایه خستگی (799/0=ICC) و ضربان قلب (937/0=ICC) پس از دو بار اجرای BSACT توسط یک آزمون‌گیرنده، همبستگی معناداری دیده شد (05/0>P). همچنین در بررسی عینیت، بین توان اوج (957/0=ICC)، توان میانگین (970/0=ICC)، توان کمینه (964/0=ICC)، نمایة خستگی (801/0=ICC) و ضربان قلب (616/0=ICC) توسط دو آزمون‌گیرنده، همبستگی معناداری دیده شد (05/0 p<). افزون بر این، نمودار بلاند-آلتمن برای ارزیابی پایایی و عینیت آزمون BSACT نشان داد که در همة متغیرها، سوگیری میانگین (میانگین اختلاف‌ها) نزدیک به صفر بود. توزیع نقاط حول خط میانگین اختلاف‌ها متمرکز بود و بیشتر نقاط در حدود اطمینان 95 درصد قرار داشتند، که نشان‌دهندة توافق قابل قبول بین اندازه‌گیری‌هاست.
 نتیجه‌گیری: به‌نظر می‌رسد آزمون میدانی جدید BSACT ، آزمونی کاربردی، معتبر و قابل ‌اطمینان برای اندازه‌گیری ظرفیت بی‌هوازی بازیکنان جوان و نیمه‌حرفه‌ای بسکتبال است. بنابراین، مربیان بسکتبال و بدنسازی می‌توانند از این آزمون به‌منظور ارزیابی اولیه و پایش مستمر ظرفیت بی‌هوازی بازیکنان و شناسایی افراد آماده و برتر، استفاده کنند.
 
 

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

Designing the basketball specific anaerobic capacity test (BSACT) based on the 30-second lower-body wingate test

نویسندگان [English]

  • Pooya Firoozian
  • Mehrdad Fathei
  • Seyyed Reza Attar Zade Hosseini
Department of Exercise Physiology, Faculty of Sport Sciences, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad
چکیده [English]

Background and Purpose: Anaerobic capacity and power play a significant role in executing sport-specific movement patterns and meeting the physiological demands of basketball players during competition. Numerous laboratory tests are available to assess these capabilities, but field tests seem to have greater practical applicability. The aim of this study was to design and evaluate the validity, reliability, and objectivity of the Basketball-Specific Anaerobic Capacity Test (BSACT) based on the 30-second Lower-Body Wingate test.
Materials and Methods: In this study the participants consisted of 30 young semi-professional basketball players (age, 17.17 ± 1.00 years; BMI, 22.61 ± 2.10 kg/m2). After designing the new test based on previous research and the opinions of experienced and expert basketball coaches, incorporating the physiological demands and basketball-specific movement patterns, including forward, backward, and lateral movements, shooting, lay-ups, dribbling, direction changes, and accelerations, aligned with the frequency and intensity of their occurrence in actual games, the test was piloted several times. Following the pilot implementations, the participants completed the 30-second Wingate test (criterion measure) and the BSACT (predictive measure) over four days with a 72-hour interval between sessions. On the first day, the criterion test was administered; on the second and third days, the predictive test was performed by the first tester; and on the fourth day, the predictive test was conducted by the second tester. Peak, average, and minimum power and fatigue index for the Wingate test were measured using the Monark ergometer, while in the new test, these parameters were measured using a stopwatch for timing and the anaerobic power by using the RAST. Post-exercise heart rate in both tests was recorded using a Polar heart rate monitor. After confirming the normality of data distribution using the Shapiro-Wilk test, Pearson's correlation coefficient was employed to assess validity, while ICC and Bland-Altman plots were used to determine reliability and objectivity. Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS version 27 and GraphPad version 10, with a significance level set at p ≤ 0.05.
Results: The results demonstrated a very strong significant correlation for validity between the two tests in peak power (r=0.811), average power (r=0.828), and minimum power (r=0.758), as well as a strong significant correlation in heart rate (r=0.623, P<0.001). However, a moderate significant correlation was observed in the fatigue index (r=0.469, P=0.009). Regarding reliability, significant correlations were found between two repetitions of the BSACT conducted by the same tester for peak power (ICC=0.960), Average power (ICC=0.981), minimum power (ICC=0.984), fatigue index (ICC=0.799), and heart rate (ICC=0.937, P<0.05). Similarly, significant correlations were observed for objectivity between the results of two testers in peak power (ICC=0.957), mean power (ICC=0.970), minimum power (ICC=0.964), fatigue index (ICC=0.801), and heart rate (ICC=0.616, P<0.05). Moreover, the Bland-Altman plot for evaluating the reliability and objectivity of the BSACT test demonstrated that, for all variables, the mean bias (mean of the differences) was close to zero. The distribution of data points was centered around the line representing the mean of the differences, with most points falling within the 95% confidence limits, indicating acceptable agreement between measurements.
 
Conclusions: The findings suggest that the BSACT is a valid and reliable field test for measuring anaerobic capacity in young semi-professional basketball players. Therefore, basketball and strength coaches can utilize BSACT for initial assessment and continuous monitoring of players' anaerobic capacity, as well as for identifying well-prepared and elite individuals.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Basketball
  • Anaerobic capacity Test
  • Wingate
  • Validity
  • Reliability
  1. Gottlieb R, Shalom A, Calleja-Gonzalez J. Physiology of Basketball – Field Tests. Review Article. J Hum Kinet. 2021 Jan 30;77:159–67.
  2. Gál-Pottyondy A, Petró B, Czétényi A, Négyesi J, Nagatomi R, Kiss RM. Collection and Advice on Basketball Field Tests—A Literature Review. Appl Sci. 2021 Sep 23;11(19):8855.
  3. Delextrat A, Cohen D. Physiological Testing of Basketball Players: Toward a Standard Evaluation of Anaerobic Fitness. J Strength Cond Res. 2008 Jul;22(4):1066–72.
  4. Ben Abdelkrim N, El Fazaa S, El Ati J. Time-motion analysis and physiological data of elite under-19-year-old basketball players during competition. Br J Sports Med. 2007 Feb;41(2):69–75; discussion 75.
  5. Eliakim A. Improving Anaerobic Fitness in Young Basketball Players: Plyometric vs. Specific Sprint Training. J Athl Enhanc. 2014;03(03).
  6. Arede J, Vaz R, Franceschi A, Gonzalo-Skok O, Leite N. Effects of a combined strength and conditioning training program on physical abilities in adolescent male basketball players. J Sports Med Phys Fitness. 2019 Aug;59(8):1298–305.
  7. Ciacci S, Bartolomei S. The effects of two different explosive strength training programs on vertical jump performance in basketball. J Sports Med Phys Fitness. 2018 Oct;58(10):1375–82.
  8. Petway AJ, Freitas TT, Calleja-González J, Medina Leal D, Alcaraz PE. Training load and match-play demands in basketball based on competition level: A systematic review. Balsalobre-Fernández C, editor. PLoS One. 2020 Mar 5;15(3):e0229212.
  9. Castillo D, Raya-González J, Scanlan AT, Sánchez-Díaz S, Lozano D, Yanci J. The influence of physical fitness attributes on external demands during simulated basketball matches in youth players according to age category. Physiol Behav. 2021 May;233:113354.
  10. McInnes SE, Carlson JS, Jones CJ, McKenna MJ. The physiological load imposed on basketball players during competition. J Sports Sci. 1995 Oct;13(5):387–97.
  11. Stojanović E, Stojiljković N, Scanlan AT, Dalbo VJ, Berkelmans DM, Milanović Z. The Activity Demands and Physiological Responses Encountered During Basketball Match-Play: A Systematic Review. Sport Med. 2018 Jan 16;48(1):111–35.
  12. Scanlan AT, Dascombe BJ, Kidcaff AP, Peucker JL, Dalbo VJ. Gender-Specific Activity Demands Experienced During Semiprofessional Basketball Game Play. Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2015 Jul;10(5):618–25.
  13. Sekulic D, Pehar M, Krolo A, Spasic M, Uljevic O, Calleja-González J, et al. Evaluation of Basketball-Specific Agility: Applicability of Preplanned and Nonplanned Agility Performances for Differentiating Playing Positions and Playing Levels. J strength Cond Res. 2017 Aug;31(8):2278–88.
  14. Sugiyama T, Maeo S, Kurihara T, Kanehisa H, Isaka T. Change of Direction Speed Tests in Basketball Players: A Brief Review of Test Varieties and Recent Trends. Front Sport Act living. 2021;3:645350.
  15. Drinkwater EJ, Pyne DB, McKenna MJ. Design and interpretation of anthropometric and fitness testing of basketball players. Sports Med. 2008;38(7):565–78.
  16. Scanlan A, Dascombe B, Reaburn P. A comparison of the activity demands of elite and sub-elite Australian men’s basketball competition. J Sports Sci. 2011 Aug;29(11):1153–60.
  17. Pojskić H, Šeparović V, Muratović M, Užičanin E. The relationship between physical fitness and shooting accuracy of professional basketball players. Mot Rev Educ Física. 2014 Dec;20(4):408–17.
  18. García F, Vázquez-Guerrero J, Castellano J, Casals M, Schelling X. Differences in Physical Demands between Game Quarters and Playing Positions on Professional Basketball Players during Official Competition. J Sports Sci Med. 2020 Jun;19(2):256–63.
  19. Edwards T, Spiteri T, Piggott B, Bonhotal J, Haff GG, Joyce C. Monitoring and Managing Fatigue in Basketball. Sports. 2018 Feb 27;6(1):19.
  20. Figueira B, Gonçalves B, Abade E, Paulauskas R, Masiulis N, Kamarauskas P, et al. Repeated Sprint Ability in Elite Basketball Players: The Effects of 10 × 30 m Vs. 20 × 15 m Exercise Protocols on Physiological Variables and Sprint Performance. J Hum Kinet. 2021 Jan 30;77:181–9.
  21. Russell JL, McLean BD, Stolp S, Strack D, Coutts AJ. Quantifying Training and Game Demands of a National Basketball Association Season. Front Psychol. 2021;12:793216.
  22. Baechle TR, Earle RW, (U.S.) NS\& CA. Essentials of Strength Training and Conditioning. Human Kinetics; 2000.
  23. Simenz CJ, Dugan CA, Ebben WP. Strength and Conditioning Practices of National Basketball Association Strength and Conditioning Coaches. J Strength Cond Res. 2005;19(3):495.
  24. Russell JL, McLean BD, Impellizzeri FM, Strack DS, Coutts AJ. Measuring Physical Demands in Basketball: An Explorative Systematic Review of Practices. Sport Med. 2021 Jan 5;51(1):81–112.
  25. Heishman AD, Daub BD, Miller RM, Freitas EDS, Bemben MG. Monitoring External Training Loads and Neuromuscular Performance for Division I Basketball Players over the Preseason. J Sports Sci Med. 2020 Mar;19(1):204–12.
  26. Mancha-Triguero D, García-Rubio J, Calleja-González J, Ibáñez SJ. Physical fitness in basketball players: a systematic review. J Sports Med Phys Fitness. 2019 Oct;59(9).
  27. Currell K, Jeukendrup AE. Validity, Reliability and Sensitivity of Measures of Sporting Performance. Sport Med. 2008;38(4):297–316.
  28. de Araujo GG, de Barros Manchado-Gobatto F, Papoti M, Camargo BHF, Gobatto CA. Anaerobic and aerobic performances in elite basketball players. J Hum Kinet. 2014 Sep 29;42:137–47.
  29. pabiran mohsen, Rajabi H, Yousefi M. Designing the Specific Anaerobic Power Test for Basketball. 2015;7(27):31–44.
  30. Carvalho HM, Coelho e Silva MJ, Figueiredo AJ, GonÇalves CE, Castagna C, Philippaerts RM, et al. Cross-Validation and Reliability of the Line-Drill Test of Anaerobic Performance in Basketball Players 14–16 Years. J Strength Cond Res. 2011 Apr;25(4):1113–9.
  31. Bar-Or O. The Wingate Anaerobic Test. Sport Med. 1987;4(6):381–94.
  32. HOFFMAN JR, EPSTEIN S, EINBINDER M, WEINSTEIN Y. A Comparison Between the Wingate Anaerobic Power Test to Both Vertical Jump and Line Drill Tests in Basketball Players. J Strength Cond Res. 2000 Aug;14(3):261–4.
  33. LaMonte MJ, Mckinnex JT, Quinn SM, Bainbridge CN, Eisenman PA. Comparison of Physical and Physiological Variables for Female College Basketball Players. J Strength Cond Res. 1999;13:264–70.
  34. Francis K. Methods of anaerobic power assessment (a statistical program for the IBM PC). Phys Ther. 1987 Feb;67(2):270–5.
  35. Fatouros IG, Laparidis K, Kambas A, Chatzinikolaou A, Techlikidou E, Katrabasas I, et al. Validity and reliability of the single-trial line drill test of anaerobic power in basketball players. J Sports Med Phys Fitness. 2011 Mar;51(1):33–41.
  36. Hopkins WG, Marshall SW, Batterham AM, Hanin J. Progressive Statistics for Studies in Sports Medicine and Exercise Science. Med Sci Sport Exerc [. 2009 Jan;41(1):3–12.
  37. Ben Abdelkrim N, Castagna C, Jabri I, Battikh T, El Fazaa S, Ati J El. Activity Profile and Physiological Requirements of Junior Elite Basketball Players in Relation to Aerobic-Anaerobic Fitness. J Strength Cond Res. 2010 Sep;24(9):2330–42.
  38. Burgess D, Naughton G, Hopkins W. Draft-camp predictors of subsequent career success in the Australian Football League. J Sci Med Sport. 2012 Nov;15(6):561–7.
  39. Baker J, Ramsbottom R, Hazeldine R. Maximal shuttle running over 40 m as a measure of anaerobic performance. Br J Sports Med. 1993 Dec;27(4):228–32.
  40. Klapcińska B, Iskra J, Poprzecki S, Grzesiok K. The effects of sprint (300 m) running on plasma lactate, uric acid, creatine kinase and lactate dehydrogenase in competitive hurdlers and untrained men. J Sports Med Phys Fitness. 2001 Sep;41(3):306–11.
  41. Gharakhanlou R, Agha-Alinejad H, Rostgar M. Correlation between RAST and 300-yard shuttle test with Wingate in measuring anaerobic power of futsal players. olympic. 2008;44(16):99–109.
  42. Agha-Alinejad H, Gharakhanlou R, Yousefvand S. Estimation of anaerobic power using a new zigzag jumping test named Tarbiat Modares Anaerobic Test (TMAT). Olympic. 2008;42(16):97–108.
  43. Habibi H, Dehkordi M, Rajabi H, Rezaei R. Designing an upper-body anaerobic power test for wrestling. Res Sport Med Technol (Motor Sport Sci). 2013;
  44. Saberi A, Rajabi H, Mohammadnia M. Validity and reliability assessment of anaerobic power tests based on Repeated Agility Anaerobic Test (RAAT) and Running-based Anaerobic Sprint Test (RAST) in estimating anaerobic power of physically active students. J Mot Sport Sci. 2009;14(7):51–60.
  45. Wilmore JH, Costill DL, Gleim GW. Physiology of Sport and Exercise. Vol. 27, Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise. 1995. p. 792.
  46. Shirazi A, Rajabi H, Agha-Alinejad H. Validity assessment of some physiological variables of the Running-based Anaerobic Sprint Test (RAST) and Wingate test in futsal national team players. Olympic. 2009;48(17):41–50.
  • تاریخ دریافت: 04 دی 1403
  • تاریخ بازنگری: 05 بهمن 1403
  • تاریخ پذیرش: 10 بهمن 1403
  • تاریخ اولین انتشار: 12 بهمن 1403
  • تاریخ انتشار: 01 تیر 1404