Validity, reliability, and the contributing physical characteristics of a modified 15m prone Yo-Yo Intermittent Recovery Test Level-1 test in elite female rugby league players

• Published in: PloS one Vol. 19; no. 6; p. e0306171
• Main Authors: Briscoe, Thomas, Darrall-Jones, Josh, Heyward, Omar, Jones, Ben, Allen, Hayden, Ramirez-Lopez, Carlos, Scantlebury, Sean
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States Public Library of Science 26.06.2024; Public Library of Science (PLoS)
• Subjects: Absorptiometry, Photon; Adult; Anthropometry; Athletes; Athletic Performance - physiology; Athletic recruitment; Biology and Life Sciences; Body composition; Body fat; Body mass; Calibration; Dual energy X-ray absorptiometry; Exercise; Exercise Test - methods; Female; Females; Fitness equipment; Football - physiology; Heart rate; Humans; Isometric; Medicine and Health Sciences; Physical characteristics; Physical fitness; Physical properties; Physical Sciences; Players; Recovery (Medical); Reliability; Reproducibility of Results; Rugby; Rugby football; Running; Running - physiology; Sensitivity analysis; Social Sciences; Validity; Velocity; Young Adult; Germany
• ISSN: 1932-6203; 1932-6203
• DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0306171

This study aims to establish the validity and reliability of the prone Yo-YoIRL1 in elite female rugby league players (part one) and determine the anthropometric and physical characteristics contributing to 15m prone Yo-YoIRL1 performance (part two). Part one, 21 subjects completed one Yo-YoIRL1, one 20m and two 15m prone Yo-YoIRL1 tests over four sessions, with 7–14 days in-between. Part two, ten subjects completed a testing battery, including body mass, height, dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry, isometric mid-thigh pull, isometric bench-press, 10m and 20m sprints and an incremental treadmill test ( V ˙ O 2 max ). The 15m prone YoYoIRL1 demonstrated poor reliability with a typical error of 68m (21%) and a smallest worthwhile change of 54m (9%). Validity analysis found the prone versions of the YoYoIRL1 were not sensitive measures of intermittent running performance. Both prone YoYoIRL1 test distances demonstrated large mean bias (76% and -37% respectively) and typical error of the estimate (19% and 21%, respectively) in comparison to the YoYoIRL1. Body mass ( r = -0.89), lean mass ( r = -0.64), body fat % ( r = -0.68), V ˙ O 2 max (l∙min -1 ) ( r = -0.64), IMTP ( r = -0.69), IBP ( r = -0.15), 10m ( r = -0.77) and 20m ( r = -0.72) momentum displayed large negative relationships with 15m prone Yo-YoIRL1 performance. Due to the poor validity of the 20m prone YoYoIRL1, the poor validity and reliability of the 15m prone YoYoIRL1, and the anthropometric and physical characteristics which negatively impact performance, practitioners should reconsider the use of the prone YoYoIRL1 test to monitor high intensity intermittent running performance.