RESUMEN
Introduction: Ice hockey is a high pace sports game that requires players to integrate multiple skills. Players face perceptive, cognitive, and motor tasks concurrently; hence, players are regularly exposed to dual- or multi-task demands. Dual-tasking has been shown to lead to decreased performance in one or both performed tasks. The degree of performance reductions might be modulated by the exhaustion of cognitive resources. Literature on dual-task paradigms that combine sport-relevant elements is scarce. Therefore, a novel paradigm combining cyclical speed of the lower extremities and concurrent visuo-verbal speed reading was tested and validated. Additionally, to understand the nature of dual-task costs, the relationship between these costs and cognitive performance was assessed. We hypothesized occurrence of dual-task costs in all athletes without relationship to single task performance. Differences in dual-task cost were expected between open-skill and closed-skill sports, as well as differing expertise levels. Level of cognitive function was expected to explain some variance in dual-task cost. Methods: A total of 322 elite athletes (120 ice hockey, 165 other team sports, 37 closed-skill sports) participated in this study. Each athlete performed a tapping task, a visuo-verbal speed-reading task, and both tasks simultaneously. All ice hockey athletes performed additional cognitive tests assessing processing speed, spatial working memory, sustained attention, two choice reaction time, and motor inhibition. Results: The results of paired-sample t-tests confirmed significant dual-task costs for all sport groups (p < 0.001). Single-task performance and dual-task costs correlated weakly in a positive direction. A one-way ANOVA revealed significantly greater costs in closed-skill sports athletes than in ice hockey and other sports athletes. No significant differences in dual-task costs were found between teams of differing expertise levels. Lastly, no significant regression model was found to predict dual-task costs from cognitive test performance. Discussion: Our study suggests that this novel dual-task paradigm was successful in inducing dual-task costs for all elite athletes. Since it distinguishes between closed-skill and open-skill sports athletes, it might be a valuable diagnostic tool for performance and for talent development of open-skill athletes. Dual-task costs could not be relevantly predicted via cognitive performance measures, questioning cognitive resource theories as an explanation for dual-task costs.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: In clinical practice range of motion (RoM) is usually assessed with low-cost devices such as a tape measure (TM) or a digital inclinometer (DI). However, the intra- and inter-rater reliability of typical RoM tests differ, which impairs the evaluation of therapy progress. More objective and reliable kinematic data can be obtained with the inertial motion capture system (IMC) by Xsens. The aim of this study was to obtain the intra- and inter-rater reliability of the TM, DI and IMC methods in five RoM tests: modified Thomas test (DI), shoulder test modified after Janda (DI), retroflexion of the trunk modified after Janda (DI), lateral inclination (TM) and fingertip-to-floor test (TM). METHODS: Two raters executed the RoM tests (TM or DI) in a randomized order on 22 healthy individuals while, simultaneously, the IMC data (Xsens MVN) was collected. After 15 warm-up repetitions, each rater recorded five measurements. FINDINGS: Intra-rater reliabilities were (almost) perfect for tests in all three devices (ICCs 0.886-0.996). Inter-rater reliability was substantial to (almost) perfect in the DI (ICCs 0.71-0.87) and the IMC methods (ICCs 0.61-0.993) and (almost) perfect in the TM methods (ICCs 0.923-0.961). The measurement error (ME) for the tests measured in degree (°) was 0.9-3.3° for the DI methods and 0.5-1.2° for the IMC approaches. In the tests measured in centimeters the ME was 0.5-1.3cm for the TM methods and 0.6-2.7cm for the IMC methods. Pearson correlations between the results of the DI or the TM respectively with the IMC results were significant in all tests except for the shoulder test on the right body side (r = 0.41-0.81). INTERPRETATION: Measurement repetitions of either one or multiple trained raters can be considered reliable in all three devices.