Do muscular strength and jump power tests reflect the effectiveness of training programs for basketball athletes?

Muscular strength (MS) and jump power (JP) tests are used to assess athletic ability and measure the effectiveness of training programs. However, their use in various sport modalities needs to be investigated further. This study aimed to explore the changes in MS and JP during three different moments of a macrocycle training session and verify the validity of the tests used to predict the effectiveness of basketball training programs. Methods: During macrocycle training (three different moments), sixteen basketball players were evaluated for MS (measured using isokinetic dynamometry at the speed of 60°/s) during concentric contraction of knee flexor and extensor muscles and JP, using countermovement vertical jump (CMVJ) on a force platform. Results: Peak torque and maximal work values for knee extension and flexion showed no differences, during the three moments analyzed. Additionally, no changes were observed for CMVJ. Conclusions: Our results suggest that the effectiveness of basketball training programs does not seem to be related to the performance achieved by athletes on the tests used. Moreover, the lack of changes in MS and JP values during the macrocycle could be related to the training structure used; volume, intensity, density and workload specificity.(AU)

Health professionals identify components of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) in questionnaires for the upper limb

BACKGROUND: Several Brazilian studies have addressed the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF), but few have analyzed the knowledge of the health professionals with regards to the ICF. OBJECTIVE: To verify whether the classification of the items in the Brazilian-Portuguese versions of The Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) and The Disabilities Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) questionnaires, obtained from health professionals who worked with patients having upper limb injuries, could be related to ICF components as defined by others studies. METHOD: There were 4 participants for the group "professionals with high familiarity of the ICF (PHF)" and 19 for the group of "professionals with some or no familiarity of the ICF (PSNF)". The participants judged whether the items on the two questionnaires belonged to the ICF body function, body structure or activity-participation component, and marked a confidence level for each trial using a numerical scale ranging from zero to 10. The items were classified by the discriminant content validity method using the Student'st-test and the Hochberg correction. The ratings were compared to the literature by the percentage of agreement and Kappa coefficient. RESULTS: The percentage of agreement of the rating from the PSNF and the PHF groups with the literature was equal to or greater than 77%. For the DASH, the agreement of the PSNF and PHF groups with the literature were, respectively, moderate (Kappa=0.46 to 0.48) and substantial (Kappa=0.62 to 0.70). CONCLUSIONS: Health professionals were able to correlate the three components of the ICF for most items on the 2 questionnaires, demonstrating some ease of understanding the ICF components. However, the relation of concept of pain with body function component is not clear for professional and deserves a more attentive approach.