Most frequent tests in the literature for the evaluation of physical qualities in elite level Paralympic wheelchair basketball: a systematic review

Introduction

Wheelchair basketball (WB) is one of the most well-known and attractive sports modalities in the paralympic movement (Luarte et al., 2022; Solera et al., 2021), emerging for the first time around the year 1946 in the US after the Second World War, being practiced by wounded soldiers who, for the most part, were former players without disabilities who wanted to carry on, in one way or another, practicing this sport (International Paralympic Commmittee, 2019).

This modality is regulated by the International Wheelchair Basketball Federation (IWBF) and establishes rules of play similar to the conventional sport, although with adaptations, among them, the wheelchair and sports classification. The latter is a mandatory requirement for athletes to participate in official competitions and consists of grouping athletes according to the functionality of their disability (IWBF, 2021b). According to the functionality presented, each athlete will be incorporated into a sport class ranging from 1.0 to 4.5, considering that, the lower their sport class, the greater the motor compromise presented by the athlete (Cavedon et al., 2018; dos Santos et al., 2017; IWBF, 2021b; Luarte et al., 2022). Therefore, no team may field athletes whose combined total of the five players on the court adds up to more than 14 points (IWBF, 2021b).

WB is an intermittent sport that demands athletes to possess adequate levels of strength in its various manifestations; speed and agility, aerobic and anaerobic endurance to perform high intensity actions with short recovery time intervals (Iturricastillo et al., 2016; Seron et al., 2019). In addition, technique is essential in the performance of athletes, since game situations entail having ball control and wheelchair handling in the actions proper and determinant of the modality, such as; pushing the chair, dribbling, turning, passing, throwing to the hoop and tilting the chair on a wheel (IWBF, 2021a; Soylu et al., 2020).

The wide variety of individual physical disabilities on a team makes physiological responses different for each player and considering the wheelchair which is a primordial part as the integration of the player with their chair allows for propulsion and sport movements that impact their performance (Goosey-Tolfrey & Leicht, 2013). The considerations of all these variables make a great challenge for researchers. With respect to the evaluations in WB, we have two relevant considerations which are the player and the wheelchair, since both form a single unit that gives an answer according to the athlete's sport form and the conditions of his wheelchair, in addition it should be considered that the performance not only depends on the physical condition of the athletes, but also on the skills, experiences and technical competencies of the sport (Goosey-Tolfrey & Leicht, 2013).

For athletes, complete performance evaluations should be considered that include aerobic, anaerobic and sport-specific abilities that allow the evaluation of individual parameters and the level of achievement in an indoor environment with the application of field tests (Vanlandewijck et al., 1999), in addition to specific laboratory tests such as the Wingate test with arm crank ergometers to evaluate maximal and average anaerobic power and fatigue index (Bartosz & Molik et al., 2010).

Evaluations in sport, are fundamental tools that allow knowing the physical condition of the athlete, the effects that one has with the practice of the activity and is the means by which coaches obtain objective parameters to make decisions and to be able to define the most appropriate type of training (González-Rico & Ramírez-Lechuga, 2018).

These evaluations are fundamental for the sports preparation of athletes considering the complexity of the systems that compose it; that is, competition system, training system and complementary factors (Gomes, 2009). Physical evaluations are closely related to the training system, which is related to the development and improvement of athletes considering the principles of modality specificity, individuality, overload, continuity, volume and intensity (Gomes, 2009 cited in Campos Campos et al., 2021; Fernández et al., 2021).

Therefore, the objective of this research is to identify the most recurrent tests in the literature, used for the evaluation of physical qualities in WB elite level.

Methods

Protocol

A systematic literature review was performed according to the guidelines set forth in the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) Statement (Moher et al., 2009; Page et al., 2021).

Data sources and search

A literature search was conducted between April and May 2021 in four electronic databases: PubMed, Web of Science (WOS), Scopus and ScienceDirect. Keywords in English were used in the searching process: Athletes, Wheelchair Basketball, Testing and Performance were entered. Key search terms were included and combined using the "AND", "OR" operator: [Athletes AND "Wheelchair basketball" AND Test AND Performance].

Eligibility Criteria

Eligibility criteria were determined according to the PICOS approach, which contemplates in its acronym; population (P), intervention (I), comparator (control) (C), outcome (O) and study design(s) (S), This strategy is used for the construction of research question and eligibility criteria (da Costa Santos et al., 2007).

Accordingly, studies were considered if (1) the sample consisted of elite athletes, (2) WB practitioners, (3) if the results of the studies dealt with the evaluation of physical qualities and (4) were published in English, Spanish and/or Portuguese.

Studies that corresponded to (1) thesis studies, (2) book chapters, (3) articles without full text and (4) case studies were excluded.

Selection of studies

First, all the articles obtained after the searching process from the databases were classified and registered in the Mendeley® program, in which duplicates were eliminated and those that did not meet the inclusion criterion of year of publication were excluded. Subsequently, the articles were reviewed by title and/or abstract, where one or more of the key terms were present. Finally, only articles that met all the inclusion criteria were considered. These studies were finally analyzed during the review process.

Process of data collection

The data collection process is based on the PRISMA flowchart. That is, three main filters were applied during the data collection process detailed in the previous point. The Mendeley® program was used to compile the information from all the selected databases and the results were recorded using an Excel® spreadsheet.

In the first instance, with the articles that were selected on the basis of the title and summary, the information was recorded with respect to: title and variable of the physical quality that it evaluates.

Then, the articles were read completely and those that met the inclusion criteria, an additional Excel spreadsheet was created, where the following information was identified: year of publication, title, authors, objective of the research, methodology, results, and conclusions.

Finally, based on the above information, two tables were prepared, firstly, with the characteristics of the studies: author, year, title, and objective. Secondly, with the aspects: author, year, methodology, results, and conclusions.

Results

Selection of studies

The initial search in the databases yielded a total of 270 articles, where 199 studies were registered after the elimination of duplicates. These articles were read by title and/or abstract in search of information relevant to our research topic, with 43 studies being selected for full reading. Finally, a total of 39 articles met the eligibility criteria and were selected for this systematic review.

Process of data collection

Table 1 shows the identification in the original language of all the articles included in the systematic review, where the largest number of articles were between 2015 and 2020.

On the other hand, Table 2 shows a summary of the selected articles that evaluated some physical quality by means of physical tests.

Finally, Table 3 shows the 6 selected articles that were exclusively dedicated to validity and reliability of tests in wheelchair basketball, referring to several physical variables.

Discussion

The objective of this systematic review was to identify the most recurrent tests in the literature, used for the evaluation of physical qualities in elite level WB. A total of 39 articles related to the objective were selected.

The main findings indicate that the most used tests and instruments were: 20m sprint, with presence in 18 studies, followed by 5m sprint, used in 11 studies, dynamometer, present in 8 studies, maximum basketball pass, with presence in 7 studies, medicine ball throw, used in 6 studies, T-test, with presence in 5 studies and Wingate, used in 5 studies. This indicates that the most evaluated physical qualities are: speed, strength, agility and anaerobic power.

The 20-meter sprint test has been used to assess the speed of WB athletes in numerous studies. This test is of simple applicability and apart from obtaining speed data, it also provides certain results about factors related to performance and pushing efficiency (Brown, 2013). The protocol consists of locating, generally, a cone in the start and finish zone (20 meters in a straight line), where with a device (photocells and/or manual stopwatch) the time used is measured. Athletes must align the large wheel of their wheelchair parallel to the start line (Molik et al., 2013). Athletes have two attempts to execute the test and the best time is recorded. Authors (Cavedon et al., 2015; Cavedon et al., 2018; Granados et al., 2015; Iturricastillo et al., 2015; Yanci et al., 2014) have used this test with and without ball, finding an increase in the time used when using the ball, that is, when performing the Sprint 20m test without ball, the range of time used is between 5.16 and 5.7 seconds, but when performing the test using the ball, the range of time is between 5.76 and 9.2 seconds. On the other hand, authors (Bergamini et al., 2015) indicate the importance of an adequate propulsion symmetry as an indicator value related to sports performance and possible injuries using the 20m Sprint test with inertia measurement units. Similarly, Ferro et al. (2021) demonstrated that there is a relationship between the speed of movement of the players and the acceleration generated from the players' wrists.

The 5-meter sprint test was the second most applied test in WB athletes. This consists of the athlete starting from a stationary position and with the front of the wheel behind the starting line, the athlete must move forward as fast as possible for 5 meters. The time it takes to travel the five meters is considered, for this generally, in the studies photocells are used for the assessment, however, it is also common to use stopwatch, in this regard, authors (Cavedon et al., 2015; Cavedon, Zancano & Milanese, 2018; De groot et al., 2012) indicate that this started when the front wheels crossed the starting line and stopped when the front wheels crossed the finish line. In terms of attempts, there are studies in which athletes perform two repetitions (Molik et al., 2013; Marszalek et al., 2019) and research applying three (De groot, 2012; Granados et al., 2018; Iturricastillo, Granados & Yanci, 2015; Yanci et al., 2018). It is important to consider the dominant wrist acceleration in the test as an indicator of higher acceleration, so states Ferro et al. (2021), where it is shown that there is a significant relationship between the average acceleration of the dominant wrist and the average speed of the wheelchair player, being this relationship stronger at the beginning (0-3 m).

To measure the grip strength, the hand dynamometer is used, where the athlete from his wheelchair, holds with one hand the instrument that will be located fully extended to the side of the wheel, and without this touching it. According to Yanci et al (2015), the protocol indicates that three maximum isometric contractions are performed for 5 seconds, with a rest period of one minute, where the highest value is considered to determine the maximum grip strength. In the case of the studies by Ferreira et al. (2017) and Weber et al. (2020), they apply two attempts with one minute of rest. Authors (Oliveira et al., 2017) state that the dynamometer is a valid tool to evaluate wheelchair propulsion. It is important to consider that sports performance values in WB athletes will be related to the different classification scores (Soylu et al., 2020).

On the other hand, one of the most widely used tests to measure explosive strength in athletes was the Maximum Basketball Pass. This test consists of placing the athlete with the front wheel behind the baseline and performing an overhead pass with both arms as far as possible from a stationary position, while one of the researchers holds the wheelchair still (Granados et al., 2015; Iturricastillo et al., 2015). Athletes have a maximum of 5 attempts where the average distance between the 5 throws is taken. It is a test of easy application and helps to have parameters referred to explosive strength in athletes. The reference values considering high and low classes oscillate between 7.8 and 13.8 meters.

The medicine ball throwing test was used in several studies to evaluate explosive strength in WB athletes. The authors mainly used 3 kg (Ferreira et al., 2017; Iturricastillo et al., 2015; Marszałek, Kosmol, Morgulec-Adamowicz, Mróz, Gryko, Klavina, Skucas, Navia & Molik, 2019; Marszalek, Kosmol, Morgulec-Adamowicz, Mróz, Gryko & Molik, 2019; Weber et al., 2020) and 5 kg (Granados et al., 2015;) balls. For this test, the authors point out that the protocol consists of the athlete supporting his back firmly on the back of his chair, holding the medicine ball with both hands and performing a throw from the chest area to the front without removing his back from the back of the chair (Ferreira et al., 2017). To maintain this position, an evaluator holds with a strip of cloth (10 cm) the chest area, trying to maintain a static position of the trunk at all times of the throw. According to the selected studies, for the 3 kg ball throw and considering high and low classes, the values oscillate between 3.09 and 7.08 meters; for the 5 kg medicine ball throw, the values oscillate between 4.86 and 4.89 meters. Authors (Granados et al., 2015) have compared the maximum pass test and medicine ball throw in first and third division teams, finding significant differences between the two with an increase of 33% and 24% respectively in the results of first division teams. The aforementioned authors (Granados et al., 2015) point out that these differences between elite and lower level players have also been observed in other sports such as rugby (Baker, 2002) and handball (Gorostiaga et al., 2005), and indicate that high absolute values of muscle strength and explosiveness might be required for successful performance in high-level BSR.

Another of the most commonly used tests in this systematic review was the T-Test (Granados et al., 2015; Iturricastillo et al., 2015; Iturricastillo et al., 2017; Tachibana et al., 2019; Yanci et al., 2015). In the case of Yanci et al. (2015) and Granados et al. (2015), they built on the protocol of Sassi et al. (2009) by making modifications for the wheelchair to allow it to always be moving forward with forward movements. From this, the studies by Iturricastillo et al. (2015), Tachibana et al. (2019) and Iturricastillo et al. (2018), employ the protocol proposed by Yanci et al. (2015). The test consists of completing a T-shaped circuit composed of four cones, moving as fast as possible, where each participant must perform the test 3 times with at least 3 minutes of rest between repetitions. The values of BSR athletes range from 14.74±1.65s (Granados Domínguez et al., 2016) to 15.3±1.2s (Romarate et al., 2020). In relation to other wheelchair sports and the agility test, there is a study conducted on nine elite tennis players, where the T-test was used, whose results were 12.42±0.99s (Sánchez-Pay et al., 2021). When comparing the data presented above in relation to BSR, it can be inferred that BSR athletes present to be slower compared to tennis players. The opposite happens when compared to a study conducted to 13 wheelchair handball athletes, where it is observed that their results in the agility test were 16.5±1.5s (Borges et al., 2017), therefore, it is appreciated that BSR athletes were more agile than handball athletes.

Finally, there is the Wingate test that evaluates anaerobic power, it is characterized for being a laboratory test since a cycloergometer for upper limbs is used. The participant starts by sitting in his or her wheelchair with the cycloergometer adjusted to the level of the shoulder joint (Molik et al., 2013). According to the protocol, athletes perform a warm-up between 10 and 20 minutes consisting of three to four 5-second sprints and then rest. This test consists of performing a maximum effort for 30 seconds with a load of 5% of body weight (Ferreira et al., 2017), however, Marszalek et al. (2019) performs a load difference according to the type of athlete classification, 4% of body mass for category A participants and 5.5% for category B players. This test delivers measures such as peak power (PP), defined as the maximum 5-second value recorded during the test measured in watts (W), mean power output (MP) as mean power achieved during the 30-second test measured in watts (W), minimum maximum power output (MPP), the highest 5-second maximum power value recorded during the Wingate test measured in watts (W) and power drop (PD) (Soylu et al., 2020). This type of testing has also been employed in other Paralympic modalities, for example, wheelchair rugby (Marcolin et al., 2020), however, its application requires specific implements that may make it difficult to access.

As for the studies that focused on validating tests for the evaluation of some physical quality, six were identified. On the one hand, Marszalek et al. (2019) whose study objective was to evaluate the test-retest reliability of field tests focused on high intensity efforts, their results were that 10 out of 11 field tests are reliable for BSR athletes, since there are no statistically significant differences between test and retest (p > .05), in addition, to presenting a strong correlation for each test (r > 0.7). On the other hand, as for the study of De Groot et al. (2012), ten tests are carried out of which six showed good reliability (ICC = 0.80 - 0.97, respectively), while the accuracy pass, free throw, tray and specific throws tests, manifested moderate reliability (ICC = 0.26 - 0.67, respectively), likewise, most of the tests showed good to moderate validity (r > 0.6).

Among the limitations of the present study, we found a lack of specificity in the writing of results by the literature investigated in terms of high and low classes, which prevented us from being able to establish certain reference values discriminating between types of classes for WB athletes. On the other hand, the lack of studies focused on women's sport made it impossible to classify results according to sex.

Conclusion

The physical variables most evaluated in the literature were speed in first place, followed by strength, agility and anaerobic power. To evaluate the mentioned variables, the authors prefer to use 20m and 5m sprints, dynamometer, maximum pass, medicine ball throw, T-test and Wingate.

Finally, the articles focused on the confirmation of reliability and validity of tests for the measurement of physical variables in WB presented good results, concluding that most of the tests evaluated are reliable and valid to evaluate physical aspects in WB athletes.

Bibliography

Author notes

** Postgrado, Universidad San Sebastián, Chile.

* Correspondence: Kevin Campos-Campos, kevincamposcampos@gmail.com

Additional information

How to cite this article: Luarte, C., Quezada, F., Pasmiño, J., Alarcón, K., Herrera, O., Cossio-Bolaños, M. & Campos-Campos, K. (2022). Most frequent tests in the literature for the evaluation of physical qualities in elite level Paralympic wheelchair basketball: a systematic review. Cultura, Ciencia y Deporte, 17(54), 133-164. https://doi.org/10.12800/ccd.v17i54.1962

Cultura, Ciencia y Deporte
ISSN: 1696-5043
Vol. 17
Num. 54
Año. 2022

Most frequent tests in the literature for the evaluation of physical qualities in elite level Paralympic wheelchair basketball: a systematic review

CristianFreddyJuanKarinaOscarMarcoKevin LuarteQuezadaPasmiñoAlarcónHerreraCossio-BolañosCampos-Campos
Universidad San SebastiánUniversidad de las AméricasUniversidad San SebastiánUniversidad de ConcepciónUniversidad Católica del MauleUniversidad Adventista de Chile,ChileChileChileChileChileChile