Views
117
Downloands
33
Tekrarlı sprint testleri(TST) kapsamında altın standart olarak kabul edilecek bir protokol olmadığı için spor bilimleri alanında tekrarlı sprint yeteneğinin değerlendirildiği testlerin güvenirliği önemlidir. Bu çalışmanın amacı genç futbolcularda 30 saniye pasif toparlanmalı 10 x 25 m düz koşu tekrarlı sprint (TST_D) ve 10 x (2 x 12.5 m) tekrarlı mekik sprint testlerinde(TMS) ölçülen performans çıktılarının ve fizyolojik yanıtların test-tekrar test güvenirliğini belirlemektir. Çalışmaya 15 genç futbolcu (yaş: 17 ± 0.37 yıl boy: 177.2 ± 6.06 cm vücut ağırlığı: 68.1 ± 5.86 kg spor yaşı: 6.73 ± 0.59 yıl) gönüllü olarak katılmıştır. Katılımcılara zemini suni çim olan futbol sahasında iki hafta içinde birbirini takip eden 2-3 gün ara ile ikişer kez TST_D ve TMS rastgele sıra ile uygulanmıştır. Testlerde toplam sprint zamanı(TSZ), en hızlı sprint zamanı(EHSZ), en yavaş sprint zamanı(EYSZ), laktik asit (dinlenik, test sonu ve toparlanma 3. dakikada), kalp atım hızı (dinlenik, test esnasında ve toparlanma 3. dakikada) ve 6 ayrı formülle yorgunluk skorları ölçülmüştür. Tekrarlı ölçümler arasındaki farklar için Bağımlı Gruplarda t Testi, güvenirlik için sınıf içi korelasyon katsayısı(SKK), tipik hata(TH) ve varyasyon katsayısı olarak tipik hata(VK_TH) hesaplanmıştır. TMS’de tekrarlı ölçümlerde performans bileşenleri benzer bulunurken(p>0.05), TST_D’de anlamlı fark saptanmıştır(p<0.05). Her iki testte ölçülen performans bileşenleri için VK_TH % 5’den düşük ancak SKK değerleri TMS için orta düzeyde, TST için düşük düzeydedir. Her iki testte yorgunluk skorlarının hesaplandığı 6 farklı formül için VK_TH kabul edilemez düzeyde yüksek, SKK ise düşüktür. Her iki testte fizyolojik değişkenler için VK_TH yüksek SKK ise orta ya da yüksek düzeydedir. Bu çalışmanın bulguları genç futbolcularda TMS protokolünün güvenirliğinin TST_D’den daha yüksek olduğunu göstermiştir. Genç futbolcularda tekrarlı sprint performansının ve fizyolojik yanıtların değerlendirilmesinde TMS daha uygun bir protokoldür.
Since there is no protocol to be considered as the gold standard within the framework of repeated sprint tests (TST), the reliability of the tests in which the ability to repeat sprint is assessed in the field of sports sciences is important. The objective of this study is to determine the reliability of performance outcomes and physiological responses measured in the 30 seconds passive recovery 10 x 25 m straight running repeated sprint (TST_D) and 10 x (2 x 12.5 m) repeated mechanical sprint tests (TMS) and test-re-test responses. 15 young footballers (age: 17 ± 0.37 years; size: 177.2 ± 6.06 cm; body weight: 68.1 ± 5.86 kg; sports age: 6.73 ± 0.59 years) participated in the study voluntarily. Participants were applied two-time TST_D and TMS randomly with a two-day interval that followed each other in two weeks on the football field, which is the ground of artificial grass. The total sprint time (TSZ), fast sprint time (EHSZ), slow sprint time (EYSZ), lactic acid (rest, test end and recovery in 3 minutes), heart rate (rest, during test and recovery in 3 minutes) and fatigue scores were measured by 6 separate formulas. For the differences between repeated measurements, the T-Test in Dependent Groups is calculated as the class-inter-correlation ratio (SKK), typical error (TH) and variation ratio (VK_TH) for reliability. While the performance components in repeated measurements in TMS are similar (p>0.05), a significant difference is found in TST_D (p<0.05). For performance components measured in both tests, VK_TH is less than 5%, but SKK values are medium for TMS, low for TST. For six different formulas where fatigue scores are calculated in both tests, VK_TH is unacceptable high and SKK is low. For the physiological variables in both tests, the high SKK for VK_TH is medium or high. The findings of this study showed that the reliability of the TMS protocol in young footballers is higher than TST_D. TMS is a more suitable protocol in the assessment of repeated sprint performance and physiological responses in young footballers.
Since no protocol is accepted as a gold standard within the context of repeated sprint tests, reliability of the tests that evaluate repeated sprint ability is very important in sport sciences. The aim of this study was to determine the test-retest reliability of performance outputs and physiological responses measured in 10x25 m repeated linear sprint test (RLST) and 10x(2x12.5 m) repeated shuttle sprint test (RST_SH) with 30 sec passive recovery in young soccer players. Fifteen young soccer players (age:17 ± 0.37 years; height:177.2 ± 6.06 cm; body mass:68.1 ± 5.86 kg) voluntarily participated in this study. Subjects participated in RLST and RST_SH in random order with 2-3 days intervals for each test within two weeks in an artificial turf. Total sprint time (TST), best sprint time (BST), worst sprint time (WST), lactic acid, heart rate and fatigue scores with 6 different formulas were measured for each test. For the difference between repeated measurements; paired sample t-test, for reliability; intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), typical error (TE) and typical error as coefficient of variation (CV_TE) were measured. Performance components were parallel in repeated measurement in RST_SH(p>0.05), in RLST on the other hand there was a significant difference(p<0.05). For performance components measured in both tests, CV_TE was less than 5 %, but ICC values were moderate for RST_SH and low for RST_S. CV_TE was unacceptably high for 6 different formulas that calculated fatigue scores in both tests, on the other hand ICC was low. For physiological variables CV_TE was high, ICC was either moderate or high in both tests. The results of the present study indicated that RST_SH protocol had higher reliability when compared with RLST in young soccer players. In addition RST_SH was found to be more suitable for evaluation of repeated sprint performance and physiological responses.
Field : Spor Bilimleri
Journal Type : Ulusal
Article Detail 
Similar Articles
Download PDF
Journal Information
Listen Paper
Cite
Print This Page
Share
Mendeley
