A Methodological Comparison of Protocols and Analytical Techniques to Assess the Outcome Measures of Submaximal Fitness Tests

Background: Submaximal fitness test (SMFT) outcome measures are frequently collected with a wide array of technologies and methodological approaches. Purpose: To examine the test-retest reliability of various SMFT outcome measures derived from different protocols and analytical techniques. Methods: Twenty-six semiprofessional adult soccer players performed 3 SMFT protocols, including 2 continuous (3 min, 11 and 12.8 km-h-1) and 1 intermittent (4 x 50 m, 18 km-h-1) twice, each separated by 7 days. Heart-rate (HR) indices (exercise HR, HR recovery) and scapula-mounted (PlayerLoad vector magnitude) and foot-mounted (flight time and contact time, stride length) microelectrical mechanical system-derived variables were collected using different time frames and analytical approaches adopted in the literature and practice. Absolute reliability was quantified as the group mean difference, typical error of measurement, also expressed as the coefficient of variation (where appropriate) and standardized units (ie, d). Intraclass correlation coefficient was used to quantify relative reliability. Results: The highest degrees of reliability were evident for exercise HR (typical error: 1.0%-1.6% points), the vertical component of PlayerLoad (expressed in arbitrary units; coefficient of variation: 5.5%-7.0%), and contact time (coefficient of variation: 1.5%-3.0%). These estimates were not influenced by SMFT protocol or analytical approach. All other measures displayed poorer reliability and/or were different between protocols and analytical methods. Conclusions: SMFT protocols impact the test-retest reliability of various outcome measures; however, exercise HR, vertical PlayerLoad, and contact time (derived from foot-mounted micro-electrical mechanical systems) appear to have stable measurement properties to assist the assessment of aerobic capacity and lower-limb neuromuscular status, respectively.