Teste funcional de desempenho da agilidade para jogadores de polo aquático competitivo: validade, confiabilidade e sensibilidade da medida
Ficheiros
Data
2015-11-09
Autores
Título da revista
ISSN da revista
Título do Volume
Editora
Resumo
Os testes existentes no polo aquático que são realizados na água procuram representar um situação específica de jogo. Entretanto, voltam-se principalmente aos deslocamentos horizontais de nado. Dessa forma, desconsideram as ações rápidas de mudança de posicionamento corporal realizadas próximas ao gol, onde o corpo assume um posicionamento mais vertical. Além disso, não ponderam a relevância da tomada de decisão e antecipação que são importantes para a adequada realização das ações no polo aquático. Assim, com o objetivo de testar a agilidade na mudança de posicionamento corporal tendo como pré-requisito a tomada de decisão, foi proposto o Teste Funcional de Desempenho da Agilidade (TFDA). O TFDA é caracterizado como um teste de tomada de decisão onde o jogador testado move-se tão rapidamente quanto possível dentro de uma área de 3 m2 tendo como referência o passe feito por outro jogador. No entanto, para sua utilização, os critérios relativos a confiabilidade, sensibilidade e validade da sua medida precisam ser testados. Inicialmente, a confiabilidade do TFDA foi verificada por meio da avaliação de quinze jogadores (16,3 ± 1,8 anos de idade) com no mínimo dois anos de experiência competitiva. Duas repetições de familiarização foram realizadas. Posteriormente, dois treinadores experientes mediram o tempo de três repetições do TFDA. A estatística descritiva, análise de variância para medidas repetidas (ANOVA), limite de concordância de 95% (LOA), coeficiente de correlação intraclasse (ICC) e erro padrão de medida (SEM) foram utilizados para a análise dos dados. Não houve diferença significativa entre as medidas que pudesse ser explicada pelo efeito do avaliador, da repetição ou da interação entre estes dois fatores (p > 0,05). O ICC médio para os avaliadores foi adequado (0,85). O SEM variou entre 0,13 s e 0,49 s. O CV médio, considerando cada indivíduo, ficou entre 6-7%. Conclui-se, então, que os critérios de confiabilidade da medida foram atendidos. Posteriormente foi proposto um segundo estudo com o objetivo de se testar a confiabilidade do TFDA. Esta iniciativa foi importante devido a necessidade de ajuste no tamanho amostral, aumento no número de familiarizações e a avaliação de jogadores mais experientes. Dessa forma, foram avaliados quarenta e dois atletas (17,81 ± 3,24 anos de idade) com no mínimo 5 anos de experiência competitiva (7,05 ± 2,84 anos) e que participam de competições a nível nacional ou internacional. Foram realizadas cinco repetições de familiarização. O tempo nas três repetições do TFDA foi mensurado por dois técnicos experientes. A estatística descritiva, análise de variância para medidas repetidas (ANOVA), limite de concordância de 95% (LOA), coeficiente de correlação intraclasse (ICC) e erro padrão de medida (SEM) foram utilizados para a análise dos dados. Os atletas completaram o TFDA em 4,15 ± 0,47 s. Não houve diferença significativa entre as medidas que pudesse ser explicada pelo efeito do avaliador, da repetição ou da interação entre estes dois fatores (p > 0,05). O valor do ICC médio foi de 0,87 (95% IC = 0,80-0,92). O SEM variou entre 0,24 s e 0,38 s. O LOA foi de 1,20 s, e o CV médio, considerando cada repetição individual, foi de 6%. Conclui-se, então, que o TFDA mostrou-se como um teste confiável de tomada de decisão para jogadores de polo aquático experientes. Finalmente, para a avaliação da sensibilidade e validade do TFDA foi realizado um estudo que se dividiu em três momentos. Seis jogadores juniores de elite do sexo masculino (16,33 ± 0,82 anos) participaram da investigação relativa a sensibilidade e da primeira proposta de se testar a validade. Eles foram medalha de prata no Campeonato Pan-Americano Júnior-2014. Na segunda investigação sobre a validade, sessenta e cinco jogadores de polo aquático competitivo do sexo masculino com idade entre 12-36 anos (18,1 ± 4,3 anos) foram divididos em três grupos (G1-3) de acordo com suas idades. No estudo da sensibilidade foi comparado o desempenho no TFDA entre dois períodos de treinamento (Março/2013 e Julho/2014). A diferença entre no desempenho no TFDA foi testada por meio do teste t pareado. Para a primeira investigação da validade, o tempo no TFDA foi correlacionado com o tempo de agilidade no teste de Velocidade/Agilidade por meio da Correlação de Pearson. Finalmente, a diferença no desempenho entre G1-3 foi avaliada por meio da Anova independente. Para os critérios relativos a sensibilidade encontrou-se que o tempo de realização do TFDA foi menor em julho/2014 (p = 0,002, r = 0,94). Para as investigações centradas na validade, afirma-se que não foi encontrada correlação significativa no desempenho do TFDA e o teste de Velocidade/Agilidade (r = 0,42, p = 0,40). Além disso, foi encontrada diferença estatística apenas entre G1 e G3 (p <0,001) e entre G2 e G3 (p = 0,008). Assim, indica-se que os critérios relativos a sensibilidade e validade do TFDA foram adequados. Como conclusão geral, afirma-se que a familiarização mostrou-se como um procedimento importante para o conhecimento do TFDA por parte dos atletas e avaliadores. Como o TFDA representa uma situação de jogo, possuindo certo grau de imprevisibilidade, é importante que os atletas realizem ao menos 3-5 familiarizações antes da avaliação propriamente dita. Este procedimento tem por objetivo evitar erros desnecessários e tornar a medida mais próxima da real condição do atleta. Sugere-se ainda que seja utilizado como referência do desempenho do atleta a média obtida para suas três repetições. Finalmente, acredita-se que o TFDA mensure a agilidade e a tomada de decisão associados as ações defensivas. Isso porque estas capacidades são avaliadas considerando-se a movimentação e percepção do atleta a partir do passe realizado por outro jogador.
Tests in water polo that are performed in the water looking for be a specific game situation. However, they measure just horizontal displacements of swimming. Thus, they disregard the quick actions of body in vertical position that occur near the goal. Also, do not consider the relevance of decision-making and anticipation that are important in water polo. Thus, in order to test the agility in changing body position, having as a prerequisite the decision-making, the Functional Test for Agility Performance (FTAP) has been proposed. The FTAP is characterized as a decision-making test where the tested player moves as rapidly as possible within an area of 3 m2 with reference to the passes made by another player. However, for its use, the criteria for reliability, sensitivity and validity of the measure need to be tested. Initially, the reliability of FTAP was verified by evaluating fifteen players (16.3 ± 1.8 years old) with at least two years of competitive experiment. Two repetitions of familiarization were performed. Later, two experienced coaches measured the time of three repetitions of the FTAP. Descriptive statistics, analysis of variance for repeated measures (ANOVA), 95% limits of agreement (LOA), intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and standard error of measurement (SEM) were used for data analysis. There was no significant difference among the measures that could be explained by the effect of the evaluator, the repetition or the interaction between these two factors (p> 0.05). The ICC average for evaluators was adequate (0.85). The SEM varied between 0.13 s and 0.49 s. The average CV, considering each individual, was between 6-7%. The measure of reliability are adequate. Subsequently a second study has been proposed in order to test the reliability of FTAP. This initiative was important because of the need to adjust the sample size, increase number of familiarization and evaluation of more experienced players. Thus, we evaluated forty-two athletes (17.81 ± 3.24 years) with at least 5 years of competitive experience (7.05 ± 2.84 years) and participating in competitions at national or international level. Five familiarization trials were performed. Two experienced coaches measured the time in the three repetitions of FTAP. Descriptive statistics, analysis of variance for repeated measures (ANOVA), 95% limits of agreement (LOA), intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and standard error of measurement (SEM) were used for data analysis. Athletes completed the FTAP at 4.15 ± 0.47 s. There was no significant difference among the measures that could be explained by the effect of the evaluator, the repetition or the interaction between these two factors (p> 0.05). The average value of the CCI was 0.87 (95% CI = 0.80-0.92). The SEM varied between 0.24 s and 0.38 s. LOA was 1.20 s and the average CV, considering each individual repeat, was 6%. It follows that the FTAP showed as a reliable test decision-making for experienced water polo players. Finally, to assess the sensitivity and validity of FTAP, was proposed a study that was divided into three stages. Six elite junior male players were (16.33 ± 0.82 years) participated in the investigation of the sensitivity and the first proposal to test the validity. They were silver medal at the Pan American Junior Championship-2014. In the second investigation into the validity, sixty-five competitive water polo players males aged 12-36 years (18.1 ± 4.3 years) were divided into three groups (G1-3) according to their ages. The sensitivity study compared the performance in FTAP between two periods of training (March/2013 to July/2014). The difference in performance between the FTAP was tested using the paired t test. For the first investigations of the validity, the time in FTAP was correlated with the agility time in Speed/Agility Test through Pearson's correlation. Finally, the difference in performance between G1-3 was evaluated with Anova. For the criteria concerning the sensitivity it was found that the time in the FTAP was lower in July/2014 (p = 0.002, r = 0.94). For investigation centered on the validity, it is stated that there was no significant correlation in the performance of FTAP and Speed/Agility test (r = 0.42, p = 0.40). In addition, statistical difference was found between G1 and G3 (p <0.001) and between G2 and G3 (p = 0.008). Thus, it is stated that the criteria for sensitivity and validity of FTAP were adequate. As a general conclusion, it is stated that familiarization proved to be an important procedure to the knowledge of FTAP by the athletes and evaluators. As the FTAP is a game situation, possessing a degree of unpredictability, it is important that athletes perform at least 3-5 familiarization prior to the evaluation itself. This procedure aims to avoid unnecessary mistakes and make the closest measure of the actual condition of the athlete. It is also suggested that the mean obtained for the three repetitions should be used as athlete's performance reference. Finally, it is believed that the FTAP measure the agility and decision-making associated with defensive actions. That's because these capabilities are evaluated considering the movement and perception of the athlete from the pass held by another player.
Tests in water polo that are performed in the water looking for be a specific game situation. However, they measure just horizontal displacements of swimming. Thus, they disregard the quick actions of body in vertical position that occur near the goal. Also, do not consider the relevance of decision-making and anticipation that are important in water polo. Thus, in order to test the agility in changing body position, having as a prerequisite the decision-making, the Functional Test for Agility Performance (FTAP) has been proposed. The FTAP is characterized as a decision-making test where the tested player moves as rapidly as possible within an area of 3 m2 with reference to the passes made by another player. However, for its use, the criteria for reliability, sensitivity and validity of the measure need to be tested. Initially, the reliability of FTAP was verified by evaluating fifteen players (16.3 ± 1.8 years old) with at least two years of competitive experiment. Two repetitions of familiarization were performed. Later, two experienced coaches measured the time of three repetitions of the FTAP. Descriptive statistics, analysis of variance for repeated measures (ANOVA), 95% limits of agreement (LOA), intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and standard error of measurement (SEM) were used for data analysis. There was no significant difference among the measures that could be explained by the effect of the evaluator, the repetition or the interaction between these two factors (p> 0.05). The ICC average for evaluators was adequate (0.85). The SEM varied between 0.13 s and 0.49 s. The average CV, considering each individual, was between 6-7%. The measure of reliability are adequate. Subsequently a second study has been proposed in order to test the reliability of FTAP. This initiative was important because of the need to adjust the sample size, increase number of familiarization and evaluation of more experienced players. Thus, we evaluated forty-two athletes (17.81 ± 3.24 years) with at least 5 years of competitive experience (7.05 ± 2.84 years) and participating in competitions at national or international level. Five familiarization trials were performed. Two experienced coaches measured the time in the three repetitions of FTAP. Descriptive statistics, analysis of variance for repeated measures (ANOVA), 95% limits of agreement (LOA), intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and standard error of measurement (SEM) were used for data analysis. Athletes completed the FTAP at 4.15 ± 0.47 s. There was no significant difference among the measures that could be explained by the effect of the evaluator, the repetition or the interaction between these two factors (p> 0.05). The average value of the CCI was 0.87 (95% CI = 0.80-0.92). The SEM varied between 0.24 s and 0.38 s. LOA was 1.20 s and the average CV, considering each individual repeat, was 6%. It follows that the FTAP showed as a reliable test decision-making for experienced water polo players. Finally, to assess the sensitivity and validity of FTAP, was proposed a study that was divided into three stages. Six elite junior male players were (16.33 ± 0.82 years) participated in the investigation of the sensitivity and the first proposal to test the validity. They were silver medal at the Pan American Junior Championship-2014. In the second investigation into the validity, sixty-five competitive water polo players males aged 12-36 years (18.1 ± 4.3 years) were divided into three groups (G1-3) according to their ages. The sensitivity study compared the performance in FTAP between two periods of training (March/2013 to July/2014). The difference in performance between the FTAP was tested using the paired t test. For the first investigations of the validity, the time in FTAP was correlated with the agility time in Speed/Agility Test through Pearson's correlation. Finally, the difference in performance between G1-3 was evaluated with Anova. For the criteria concerning the sensitivity it was found that the time in the FTAP was lower in July/2014 (p = 0.002, r = 0.94). For investigation centered on the validity, it is stated that there was no significant correlation in the performance of FTAP and Speed/Agility test (r = 0.42, p = 0.40). In addition, statistical difference was found between G1 and G3 (p <0.001) and between G2 and G3 (p = 0.008). Thus, it is stated that the criteria for sensitivity and validity of FTAP were adequate. As a general conclusion, it is stated that familiarization proved to be an important procedure to the knowledge of FTAP by the athletes and evaluators. As the FTAP is a game situation, possessing a degree of unpredictability, it is important that athletes perform at least 3-5 familiarization prior to the evaluation itself. This procedure aims to avoid unnecessary mistakes and make the closest measure of the actual condition of the athlete. It is also suggested that the mean obtained for the three repetitions should be used as athlete's performance reference. Finally, it is believed that the FTAP measure the agility and decision-making associated with defensive actions. That's because these capabilities are evaluated considering the movement and perception of the athlete from the pass held by another player.
Descrição
Tese de Doutoramento em Ciências do Desporto
Palavras-chave
Polo aquático , Tomada de decisão , Validade , Sensibilidade , Desportos coletivos , Treino , Agilidade