Printer Friendly

Evaluation of body composition and muscular strength in different sports/Procena telesnog sastava i misicne snage kod razlicitih sportova.

Introduction

Today, professional sports function as strictly controlled systems and nothing is random. The entire training process is conducted by a multidisciplinary team of experts that cover all aspects necessary for optimal development of each athlete. An integral part of this process is monitoring the progress of athletes and training results. Methods used to achieve the best results are various and numerous. Among other methods, determination of body composition and measurements of dynamometric parameters, are highly reliable indicators of performance and progress in the training process.

Body height (BH) and body mass (BM) are the fundamental indicators of body growth and development. They are the result of the genetic potential and their interaction with environmental factors [1]. Determination of body composition provides information about the relationship between the fat and muscle mass, which is essential in monitoring the training process and sports achievements. The amount and distribution of fat and muscle mass are affected by many factors such as age, sex, race, diet, physical activity, etc. [2]. Due to a balanced diet and intense physical activity, athletes have different anthropometric parameters and energy capacity compared with non-athletes [3].

There are many methods which are used to analyze the body composition. The most reliable methods are computerized tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MR!). These methods are too expensive and complicated for routine use. However, there are simpler, but less precise methods, which are easily accessible, cheaper and can be applied in large samples. In everyday practice, the most frequently used methods are anthropometric measurements and bioelectrical impedance method.

Measurements of muscle strength are among the most specific and the most accurate assessments of the functional state of the locomotor system. In addition, the muscular strength in athletes is also an indirect indicator of sports achievement [4]. Muscles have different strength, which depends on the needs, and muscle strength is directly proportional to the muscle profile. Methods for assessing muscle strength include subjective assessment of muscle strength, manual muscle test, dynamometry and dynamography.

The aim of this study was to evaluate body composition and muscle strength in different sports, as well as to establish the correlation between anthropometric and dynamometric parameters of athletes.

Material and Methods

The study included 45 male participants who were divided into three groups. The first group included 15 handball players, the second included 15 football players, and the third group included 15 sprinters. The study was conducted at the Laboratory of Functional Diagnostics of the Department of Physiology, Faculty of Medicine in Novi Sad. The subjects were healthy at the time of testing, and after a detailed explanation of the test protocol, they signed a voluntary informed consent to participate in the research.

The athletes underwent basic anthropometric measurements, analysis of body composition, and anthropometric determination of the percentage of body fat mass based on the skinfold thickness, as well as dynamometric measurement of muscle strength.

The following anthropometric parameters were measured--BM, BH, 8 body circumferences (forearm, flexed and relaxed upper arm, chest, waist, hip, midthigh and calf), 7 skinfold thickness sites (chest, subscapular, middle axillary, biceps, triceps, abdominal, suprailiac, supraspinal, front thigh and medial calf). Stadiometer with an accuracy of 0.1 cm was applied for the measuring the BH. The BM was measured by medical decimal scales with sliding weights with an accuracy of 0.1 kg. Tape measure with precision of 0.1 cm was used to measure body circumferences. Holtain Koln caliper with an accuracy of 0.1 mm was used to measure skinfold thickness. The measurements were performed on the right side of the body at 7 sites, according to the standards of the International Society for the Advancement of Kinanthropometry [5]. These values were used to calculate the total body fat by using a regression equation.

According to the World Health Organization (WHO) recommendations, normal body mass index (BMI) is 18.5-24.9 kg/[m.sup.2], overweigh--25-29.9 kg/[m.sup.2], and all values over 30 kg/[m.sup.2] are considered as obesity. Reference values for body fat in athletes depend on the sports discipline. Fleck and Wilmore [6] recommended the following: for handball players--10-12%, football players--10% and for sprinters 8-16%.

Dynamometric testing of the strength of the calf extensors and forearm flexors was performed using the machine Concept 2 DYNO. Maximum (MAXen and MAXfr) and average values (Aen and Afr) of load in kilograms (kg) and strength of muscle contractions of the calf extensors and forearm flexors (Pen and Pfr) expressed in watts (W) were analyzed.

The results were statistically analyzed, especially the mean value (X), standard deviation (SD), student's t-test, and Pearson's coefficient of correlation (r).

Results

The average values of BM, BH, age (years), and sports experience (years) in all three groups of athletes, are presented in Table 1. Between the tested groups, in terms of BM, there was a statistically significant difference (p < 0.05), while in terms of BH, there were no statistically significant differences (p > 0.05) between handball and football players and sprinters, but between handball players and sprinters there was a statistically significant difference (p < 0.05).

Values of BMI and body fat percentage (BF %) are presented in Table 2. Between handball and football players, as well as handball players and sprinters, there was a statistically significant difference in the BMI (p < 0.05), but between football players and sprinters, no significant difference (p > 0.05) was found. However, there was a statistically significant difference in values of BF % (p <0.05) between the groups of athletes.

The Aen, Maxen and Pen of calf extensors are shown in Table 3. In all observed groups of athletes there was not a statistically significant difference (p > 0.05) between measured values.

The Afr and MAXfr in the examined groups of athletes are presented in Graph 1. There were statistically significant differences in the values of Afr and MAXfr (p < 0.05) between handball and football players, and handball players and sprinters. However, between football players and sprinters there were no statistically significant differences in values of the observed parameters (p > 0.05).

The values of Pfr are shown in Graph 2. There was a statistically significant difference (p < 0.05), in the values of Pfr, among handball and football players, as well as handball players and sprinters, but between football players and sprinters, a difference was not found (p > 0.05).

There was a positive correlation between the BF % and all observed dynamometric parameters of calf extensors: Aen, Maxen, Pen (r = 0,42) in groups of handball and football players, while in the group of sprinters, the correlation was found between body composition and BF % and Pen (r = 0,41).

Discussion

The training process in elite athletes is highly specialized and requires constant upgrading. Its main task is to maximize the sport results fueled by high individual and team potential.

This study included three groups of professional athletes: handball players, football players and sprinters. By analyzing the basic anthropometric parameters, it was established that handball players were significantly heavier compared to football players and athletes. In terms of BH, handball players were the highest, but not statistically significantly higher from football players; however, the difference was statistically significant compared to the BH of sprinters. These basic anthropometric differences can be attributed to the specific requirements of individual sports, which influence the initial selection of athletes at an early age.

There was a statistically significant difference (p < 0.05) in the BMI between handball and football players, and handball players and sprinters, while no significant difference (p > 0.05) was found between football players and sprinters. In handball players the average BMI was 25.9 [+ or -] 2.6 kg/[m.sup.2], football players 23.4 [+ or -] 1.2 kg/[m.sup.2] while in sprinters it was 22.3 [+ or -] 2.1 kg/[m.sup.2]. These results were expected, and explained by difference in BM of examined groups. Our results are in accordance with literature findings where handball players also presented with higher BMI [7]. According to the reference values of the WHO, the BMI in handball players may be regarded as increased. The BMI takes into account only the height and weight of the individual; the body composition is not taken into account [8], and therefore it is not considered a good indicator in terms of the amount of body fat mass in athletes, because high values indicate a developed muscle mass, rather than an increased amount of adipose tissue [9].

There was a statistically significant difference among the observed groups of athletes in assessment of BF % (p < 0.05). The average BF % among handball players was 12 [+ or -] 3%, among football players it was 10 [+ or -] 2%, and among sprinters 8 [+ or -] 3%. These values are in the range of reference values for given sports disciplines. Skinfold thickness measurement provides a good estimate of body fat mass in people with normal weight and normal distribution of fat mass, because it reflects the subcutaneous adipose tissue.

The differences in motor skills, sources of energy for muscle contraction and psychological profile in certain sports, imposed a division of sports into groups. In one group of sports, training of endurance is dominant, while in the other, the emphasis is on developing power [10, 11]. However, all sports apply strength training. The volume and intensity of training in different sports is different [12].

In respect to Aen, MAXen, and Pen of calf extensors, measured in handball players, football players and sprinters, no statistically significant differences were found (p > 0.05). The values were high in all three groups, because of the training process where, among other things, strength exercises of the lower extremities were dominant. In terms of Afr, MAXfr, and Pfr of forearm flexors, there were statistically significant difference in values (p < 0.05) between handball and football players, and handball players and sprinters, while no statistically significant difference was found (p > 0.05) between football players and sprinters. Significantly higher values of all parameters were found in handball players, due to a specific training, which includes a wide variety of exercises developing strength of the upper extremities and the development of explosive throwing strength, important in handball. Unlike handball players, football players and sprinters do not have strength training of the upper limbs, so it is not so emphasized.

In handball and football players, there was a correlation between the BF % and Aen, MAXen, and Pen of calf extensors. On the other hand, in the group of sprinters, a correlation exists only between the BF % and Pen of calf extensors. The registered correlation may be explained by specific requirements of individual sports and development of muscular strength of certain muscle groups, which is reflected on the body composition of sprinters.

Conclusion

There are significant differences between the examined groups related to the values of body fat measured by anthropometric methods. In athletes, the body mass index is not a good indicator of the amount of body fat. The dynamometric parameters of the calf extensors were high in all three groups, whereas the dynamometric parameters of the forearm flexors were significantly higher in the group of handball players. The parameters of body composition were in positive correlation with the dynamometric parameters of lower extremities in all three groups of athletes.
Abbreviations

BH      --body height
BM      --body mass
BMI     --body mass index
BF %    --body fat percentage
Aen     --average value of load of the calf extensors
MAXen   --maximum value of load of the calf extensors
Pen     --strength of muscle contraction of calf extensors
Afr     --average value of load of forearm flexors
MAXfr   --maximum value of load of forearm flexors
Pfr     --strength of muscle contraction of forearm flexors
WHO     --World Health Organization
CT      --computerized tomography
MRI     --magnetic resonance imaging


https://doi.org/10.2298/MPNS1706150K

References

[1.] Simic S, Vasic G, Jakonic D. Telesna visina, telesna masa i uhranjenost studenata Univerziteta u Novom Sadu. Medicina danas. 2010;9|(4-6):141-6.

[2.] Srdic B, Stokic E, Polzovic A. Odnos parametara koji definisu velicinu i raspored masnog tkiva. Med Pregl. 2003;56(56):232-6.

[3.] Radu LE, Popovici IM, Puni AR. Comparison of anthropometric characteristics between athletes and non-athletes. Procedia Soc Behav Sci. 2015;191:495-9.

[4.] Obradovic D, Milutinovic B, Ulic D, Bozic-Krstic V Kineziologija. Beograd: Zavod za udzbenike i nastavna sredstva; 2002.

[5.] International Society for the Advancement of Kinanthropometry (ISAK). International Standards for anthropometric assessment. Underdale: The International Society for the Advancement of Kinanthropometry; 2001.

[6.] DeVries HA, Colak-Antic B, Zaric M. Fiziologija fizickih napora u sportu i fizickom vaspitanju. Beograd: Zajednica fizicke kulture SR Srbije; 1976.

[7.] Karaba-Jakovljevic D, Jovanovic G, Eric M, Klasnja A, Slavic D, Lukac D. Anthropometric characteristics and functional capacity of elite rowers and handball players. Med Pregl. 2016;69(9-10):267-73.

[8.] Rajkumar RV. Endomorphy dominance among non-athlete population in all the ranges of body mass index. Int J Physiother Res. 2015;3(3):1068-74.

[9.] Snijder MB, Kuyf BE, Deurenberg P. Effect of body build on the validity of predicted body fat from body mass index and bioelectrical impedance. Ann Nutr Metab. 1999;43(5):277-85.

[10.] Popadic-Gacesa J. Komparativna analiza razvoja snage kod osoba razlicitih sportskih specijalnosti [magistarska teza]. Novi Sad: Univerzitet u Novom Sadu, Medicinski fakultet; 2003.

[11.] Jones DA, Rutherford OM. Human muscle strength training the effects of three different regimens and the nature of the resultant changes. J Physiol. 1987;391:1-11.

[12.] Drapsin M. Fizioloski odgovor organizma sportista i nesportista na programiranu fizicku aktivnost [magistarska teza]. Novi Sad: Univerzitet u Novom Sadu, Medicinski fakultet; 2003.

Rad je primljen 17. I 2017.

Recenziran 13. IV 2017.

Prihvacen za stampu 14. IV 2017.

BIBLID.0025-8105:(2017):LXX:5-6:150-154.

Vedrana KARAN (1), Aleksandra RAKOVAC (1), Mladen KARAN (2,3), Milan POPOVIC (4), Jelena KLASNJA (5) and Damir LUKAC (1)

University of Novi Sad, Faculty of Medicine, Novi Sad, Department of Physiology (1)

Department of Surgery (2)

Clinical Center of Vojvodina, Novi Sad, Clinic of Neurosurgery (3)

University of Novi Sad, Faculty of Medicine, Novi Sad, Department of Histology and Embryology (4)

Clinical Center of Vojvodina, Novi Sad, Laboratory of Functional Diagnostics (5)

Corresponding Author: Dr Aleksandra Rakovac, Medicinski fakultet, Katedra za fiziologiju, 21000 Novi Sad, Hajduk Veljkova 3, E-mail: aleksandra.rakovac@mf.uns.ac.rs
Table 1. Average values of BM, BH, age (years) and sports
experience (years) of examinees

Tabela 1. Prosecne vrednosti telesne mase, telesne visine,
godina zivota i sportskog staza ispitanika

                              Body weight (kg)    Height (cm)
                              Telesna masa (kg)   Visina (cm)

Handball players/Rukometasi
X                                   92.8              189
SD                                   8.9              8.9
Football players/Fudbaleri
X                                   80.8              186
SD                                   5.7               5

Sprinters/Sprinteri
X                                    74              182.1
SD                                   7.6              3.6

                               Age (years)    Sport experience (years)
                              Starost (god)   Sportsko iskustvo (god)

Handball players/Rukometasi
X                                  21                    8
SD                                  1                    2
Football players/Fudbaleri
X                                  20                    9
SD                                  1                    2

Sprinters/Sprinteri
X                                  19                    7
SD                                  2                    2

Table 2. The values of BMI and BF %

Tabela 2. Vrednosti BMI i BF %

                     Handball players   Football players   Sprinters
                     /Rukometasi        /Fudbaleri         /Sprinteri

BMI (kg/[m.sup.2])   25.9               23.4               22.3
BF (%)               12                 10                 8

BMI--indeks telesne mase; BF %-% telesne masti

Table 3. Values of Aen, Maxen, Pen, Afr, MAXfr and Pfr

Tabela 3. Vrednosti Aen, MAXen, Pen, Afr, MAXfr i Pfr

Parameters/Parametri        Handball players    Football players
                            /Rukometasi         /Fudbaleri

Aen (kg)--X [+ or -] SD     182 [+ or -] 29.3   177 [+ or -] 32.7
MAXen (kg)--X [+ or -] SD   193 [+ or -] 29.1   189 [+ or -] 30.1
Pen (W)--X [+ or -] SD      987 [+ or -] 219    974 [+ or -] 217

Parameters/Parametri        Sprinters/Sprinteri

Aen (kg)--X [+ or -] SD     174 [+ or -] 35.4
MAXen (kg)--X [+ or -] SD   185 [+ or -] 33.4
Pen (W)--X [+ or -] SD      893 [+ or -] 180.5

Legenda: Aen--prosecna vrednost savladanog opterecenja ekstenzora
potkolenice, MAXen--maksimalna vrednost savladanog opterecenja
ekstenzora potkolenice, Pen--snaga misicne kontrakcije ekstenzora
potkolenice, Afr--prosecna vrednost savladanog opterecenja fleksora
podlaktice, MAXfr--maksimalna vrednost savladanog opterecenja
fleksora podalktice, Pfr--snaga misicne kontrakcije fleksora
podlaktice

Graph 1. The average and maximum values of load of
forearm flexors

Grafikon 1. Prosecna i maksimalna vrednost savladanog
opterecenja fleksora podlaktice

                    Afr     MAXfr

Handball players   80,5     86,8
Rukometasi

Football players   70,9     76,6
Fudbaleri

Sprinters          69       75
Sprinteri

Note: Table made from bar graph.

Graph 2. The strength of muscle contraction of forearm
flexors

Grafikon 2. Snaga misione kontrakcije fleksora podlaktice

                   Pfr

Handball players   380
Rukometasi

Football players   329
Fudbaleri

Sprinters          292
Sprinteri

Note: Table made from bar graph.
COPYRIGHT 2017 Drustvo Lekara Vojvodine
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2017 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Title Annotation:Original study/Originalni naucni rad
Author:Karan, Vedrana; Rakovac, Aleksandra; Karan, Mladen; Popovic, Milan; Klasnja, Jelena; Lukac, Damir
Publication:Medicinski Pregled
Article Type:Report
Date:May 1, 2017
Words:2739
Previous Article:The quality of voice and speech before and after surgical treatment of bilateral recurrent laryngeal nerve paralysis/ Kvalitet glasa i govora pre i...
Next Article:Significance and role of homeostatic model assessment in the evaluation of glucose regulation mechanisms/ Znacaj i upotreba parametara modela...
Topics:

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2019 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters