The combined strength of standardized lab sprint testing and wheelchair mobility field testing in wheelchair tennis players.

IF 2.2 4区医学 Q1 REHABILITATION

American Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation Pub Date : 2025-02-24 DOI:10.1097/PHM.0000000000002717

Rowie J F Janssen, Marit P van Dijk, Thomas Rietveld, Sonja de Groot, Lucas H V van der Woude, Han Houdijk, Riemer J K Vegter

{"title":"The combined strength of standardized lab sprint testing and wheelchair mobility field testing in wheelchair tennis players.","authors":"Rowie J F Janssen, Marit P van Dijk, Thomas Rietveld, Sonja de Groot, Lucas H V van der Woude, Han Houdijk, Riemer J K Vegter","doi":"10.1097/PHM.0000000000002717","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: This cross-sectional study examined associations between wheelchair sprint and anaerobic power (measured in the lab) and wheelchair mobility performance (measured in the field) among two groups of wheelchair tennis players. Additionally, construct validity was assessed for both lab and field tests.Design: Nine amateur and nine elite wheelchair tennis players performed a Sprint and Wingate test on a wheelchair ergometer in the lab and a Sprint, Illinois and Spider test in the field, with inertial measurement units on their wheelchairs. Associations were assessed using regression analyses, and construct validity was assessed with an independent t-test (elite vs. amateur).Results: The strongest associations were observed between lab outcomes and field sprint power (R2 > 90%), followed by peak linear velocity and test duration (R2 = 77-85%), while peak rotational velocity showed the lowest associations with lab outcomes (R2 = 69-80%). The elite group outperformed the amateur group on all test outcomes.Conclusion: Despite differences in lab- and field-testing methodologies (e.g., trunk influence, linear/rotational components), the strong associations indicate overlap in measured constructs. Field testing offers valuable insight into practical performance, whereas lab testing enables in-depth biomechanical and physiological analyses. All tests effectively discriminate between elite and amateur wheelchair tennis players.","PeriodicalId":7850,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/PHM.0000000000002717","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: This cross-sectional study examined associations between wheelchair sprint and anaerobic power (measured in the lab) and wheelchair mobility performance (measured in the field) among two groups of wheelchair tennis players. Additionally, construct validity was assessed for both lab and field tests.

Design: Nine amateur and nine elite wheelchair tennis players performed a Sprint and Wingate test on a wheelchair ergometer in the lab and a Sprint, Illinois and Spider test in the field, with inertial measurement units on their wheelchairs. Associations were assessed using regression analyses, and construct validity was assessed with an independent t-test (elite vs. amateur).

Results: The strongest associations were observed between lab outcomes and field sprint power (R2 > 90%), followed by peak linear velocity and test duration (R2 = 77-85%), while peak rotational velocity showed the lowest associations with lab outcomes (R2 = 69-80%). The elite group outperformed the amateur group on all test outcomes.

Conclusion: Despite differences in lab- and field-testing methodologies (e.g., trunk influence, linear/rotational components), the strong associations indicate overlap in measured constructs. Field testing offers valuable insight into practical performance, whereas lab testing enables in-depth biomechanical and physiological analyses. All tests effectively discriminate between elite and amateur wheelchair tennis players.

查看原文本刊更多论文

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

American Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation 医学-康复医学

CiteScore

4.60

自引率

6.70%

发文量

423

审稿时长

1 months

期刊介绍： American Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation focuses on the practice, research and educational aspects of physical medicine and rehabilitation. Monthly issues keep physiatrists up-to-date on the optimal functional restoration of patients with disabilities, physical treatment of neuromuscular impairments, the development of new rehabilitative technologies, and the use of electrodiagnostic studies. The Journal publishes cutting-edge basic and clinical research, clinical case reports and in-depth topical reviews of interest to rehabilitation professionals. Topics include prevention, diagnosis, treatment, and rehabilitation of musculoskeletal conditions, brain injury, spinal cord injury, cardiopulmonary disease, trauma, acute and chronic pain, amputation, prosthetics and orthotics, mobility, gait, and pediatrics as well as areas related to education and administration. Other important areas of interest include cancer rehabilitation, aging, and exercise. The Journal has recently published a series of articles on the topic of outcomes research. This well-established journal is the official scholarly publication of the Association of Academic Physiatrists (AAP).