IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v17y2020i12p4545-d375730.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Validity and Reliability of a New Test of Change of Direction in Fencing Athletes

Author

Listed:
  • Hichem Chtara

    (Tunisian Research Laboratory “Sport Performance Optimisation”, National Center of Medicine and Science in Sports, Tunis 1004, Tunisia)

  • Yassine Negra

    (Research Unit (UR17JS01) “Sport Performance, Health & Society”, Higher Institute of Sport and Physical Education of Ksar Saîd, University of “La Manouba”, Tunis 2010, Tunisia)

  • Helmi Chaabene

    (Division of Training and Movement Sciences, Research Focus Cognition Sciences, University of Potsdam, Am Neuen Palais 10, 14469 Potsdam, Germany
    High Institute of Sports and Physical Education, Kef, University of Jendouba, Tunis 8100, Tunisia)

  • Moktar Chtara

    (Tunisian Research Laboratory “Sport Performance Optimisation”, National Center of Medicine and Science in Sports, Tunis 1004, Tunisia)

  • John Cronin

    (Sports Performance Research Institute New Zealand, AUT University, Auckland 1010, New Zealand)

  • Anis Chaouachi

    (Tunisian Research Laboratory “Sport Performance Optimisation”, National Center of Medicine and Science in Sports, Tunis 1004, Tunisia
    PVF Football Academy, Hang Yen, Văn Giang 160000, Vietnam)

Abstract

The aim of this study was to validate a new test of change of direction (COD) for fencer athletes and to establish its relationship with selected measures of physical fitness. Thirty-nine fencer athletes participated to this study (age: 20.8 ± 3.0 years). They performed the new specific fencing COD test (SFCODT) on two separate occasions to establish its reliability. In addition, assessment of COD, jumping ability (i.e., squat jump, countermovement jump, five jump test), sprint time (e.g., 5-m, 10-m and 20-m), isokinetic concentric and eccentric quadriceps, and hamstring force tests were assessed. To establish SFCODT’s construct validity, two subgroups were identified based on their international and national fencing results: High- vs. low-ranked fencer athletes. Reliability, validity, and sensitivity of the SFCODT were established from the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), typical error of measurement (TEM), smallest worthwhile change (SWC), and receiving operator characteristic (ROC) analysis. The ICC of SFCODT was excellent at >0.95, and the TEM was < 5%. Based on the usefulness analysis, the ability to detect small performance changes can be rated as “good” in fencer athletes (SWC > TEM). SFCODT was very largely associated with the COD test and moderate to very large associated with jumping ability, sprint time, and isokinetic strength. High-ranked fencer athletes were better than low-ranked fencer athletes on SFCODT ( p < 0.01). The area under the ROC curve was 0.76. In conclusion, the SFCODT is a highly reliable, valid, and sensitive test. Therefore, the SFCODT could be used by practitioners to evaluate specific CODS performance in fencer athletes.

Suggested Citation

  • Hichem Chtara & Yassine Negra & Helmi Chaabene & Moktar Chtara & John Cronin & Anis Chaouachi, 2020. "Validity and Reliability of a New Test of Change of Direction in Fencing Athletes," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(12), pages 1-13, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:12:p:4545-:d:375730
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/12/4545/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/12/4545/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:12:p:4545-:d:375730. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.