The ecological validity of traditional standing and novel bicycle balance and agility tests for predicting performance in mountain bikers

K. Buchholtz; M. Lambert; T. L. Burgess

doi:10.1016/j.smhs.2022.10.003

The ecological validity of traditional standing and novel bicycle balance and agility tests for predicting performance in mountain bikers

K. Buchholtz^*
, M. Lambert
, T. L. Burgess

^*Corresponding author for this work

University of Cape Town
LUNEX University
Stellenbosch University

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › Academic › peer-review

5 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Falls are a common mechanism of injury in mountain biking and may be related to a loss of control of the bicycle. Traditionally, the components of bicycle control (balance and agility) are measured in standing and running, which may not reflect the skills required in mountain biking. In this paper, we present the validity of both traditional standing and novel bicycle-specific balance tests in mountain bikers. Twenty-nine male and female participants completed indoor laboratory tests and an outdoor downhill trail. Participants completed single-leg stance balance, Y-balance test, one static and four dynamic bicycle-specific balance tests, a bicycle agility test, and an outdoor downhill trail. Single-leg stance balance and Y-balance tests with eyes open had poor validity when associated with bicycle control. The static (r = −0.57, p = 0.001) and four dynamic bicycle balance tests (r = −0.51 to −0.78, p = 0.005 to 0.0001), and the bicycle agility test (r = 0.87, p < 0.0001) had moderate to strong relationships with the outdoor downhill run. Single-leg stance balance and Y-balance tests with eyes open are not valid measures of performance on a mountain bike, and should not be used to assess these populations. Our novel bicycle balance tests have adequate validity to be used as measures of performance in mountain bikers.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	287-292
Number of pages	6
Journal	Sports Medicine and Health Science
Volume	4
Issue number	4
Early online date	2022
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smhs.2022.10.003
Publication status	Published - Dec 2022
Externally published	Yes

Keywords

Bicycling
Control
Proprioception

Access to Document

10.1016/j.smhs.2022.10.003

The-ecological-validity-of-traditional-standing-and-novel-bicycle-balance-and-agility-tests-for-predicting-performance-i.pdfFinal published version, 713 KBLicence: CC BY

Cite this

@article{270edadd67d7498c93b89b836a92ff5d,

title = "The ecological validity of traditional standing and novel bicycle balance and agility tests for predicting performance in mountain bikers",

abstract = "Falls are a common mechanism of injury in mountain biking and may be related to a loss of control of the bicycle. Traditionally, the components of bicycle control (balance and agility) are measured in standing and running, which may not reflect the skills required in mountain biking. In this paper, we present the validity of both traditional standing and novel bicycle-specific balance tests in mountain bikers. Twenty-nine male and female participants completed indoor laboratory tests and an outdoor downhill trail. Participants completed single-leg stance balance, Y-balance test, one static and four dynamic bicycle-specific balance tests, a bicycle agility test, and an outdoor downhill trail. Single-leg stance balance and Y-balance tests with eyes open had poor validity when associated with bicycle control. The static (r = −0.57, p = 0.001) and four dynamic bicycle balance tests (r = −0.51 to −0.78, p = 0.005 to 0.0001), and the bicycle agility test (r = 0.87, p < 0.0001) had moderate to strong relationships with the outdoor downhill run. Single-leg stance balance and Y-balance tests with eyes open are not valid measures of performance on a mountain bike, and should not be used to assess these populations. Our novel bicycle balance tests have adequate validity to be used as measures of performance in mountain bikers.",

keywords = "Bicycling, Control, Proprioception",

author = "K. Buchholtz and M. Lambert and Burgess, \{T. L.\}",

note = "Funding Information: The authors would like to thank and acknowledge Mr Charlie Fethney for his data capturing assistance, and A/Prof Jeroen Swart and Dr Mike Posthumus for their professional input on the development of the dynamic bicycle balance tests. Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2022 Chengdu Sport University",

year = "2022",

month = dec,

doi = "10.1016/j.smhs.2022.10.003",

language = "English",

volume = "4",

pages = "287--292",

journal = "Sports Medicine and Health Science",

issn = "2666-3376",

publisher = "KeAi Communications Co.",

number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The ecological validity of traditional standing and novel bicycle balance and agility tests for predicting performance in mountain bikers

AU - Buchholtz, K.

AU - Lambert, M.

AU - Burgess, T. L.

N1 - Funding Information: The authors would like to thank and acknowledge Mr Charlie Fethney for his data capturing assistance, and A/Prof Jeroen Swart and Dr Mike Posthumus for their professional input on the development of the dynamic bicycle balance tests. Publisher Copyright: © 2022 Chengdu Sport University

PY - 2022/12

Y1 - 2022/12

N2 - Falls are a common mechanism of injury in mountain biking and may be related to a loss of control of the bicycle. Traditionally, the components of bicycle control (balance and agility) are measured in standing and running, which may not reflect the skills required in mountain biking. In this paper, we present the validity of both traditional standing and novel bicycle-specific balance tests in mountain bikers. Twenty-nine male and female participants completed indoor laboratory tests and an outdoor downhill trail. Participants completed single-leg stance balance, Y-balance test, one static and four dynamic bicycle-specific balance tests, a bicycle agility test, and an outdoor downhill trail. Single-leg stance balance and Y-balance tests with eyes open had poor validity when associated with bicycle control. The static (r = −0.57, p = 0.001) and four dynamic bicycle balance tests (r = −0.51 to −0.78, p = 0.005 to 0.0001), and the bicycle agility test (r = 0.87, p < 0.0001) had moderate to strong relationships with the outdoor downhill run. Single-leg stance balance and Y-balance tests with eyes open are not valid measures of performance on a mountain bike, and should not be used to assess these populations. Our novel bicycle balance tests have adequate validity to be used as measures of performance in mountain bikers.

AB - Falls are a common mechanism of injury in mountain biking and may be related to a loss of control of the bicycle. Traditionally, the components of bicycle control (balance and agility) are measured in standing and running, which may not reflect the skills required in mountain biking. In this paper, we present the validity of both traditional standing and novel bicycle-specific balance tests in mountain bikers. Twenty-nine male and female participants completed indoor laboratory tests and an outdoor downhill trail. Participants completed single-leg stance balance, Y-balance test, one static and four dynamic bicycle-specific balance tests, a bicycle agility test, and an outdoor downhill trail. Single-leg stance balance and Y-balance tests with eyes open had poor validity when associated with bicycle control. The static (r = −0.57, p = 0.001) and four dynamic bicycle balance tests (r = −0.51 to −0.78, p = 0.005 to 0.0001), and the bicycle agility test (r = 0.87, p < 0.0001) had moderate to strong relationships with the outdoor downhill run. Single-leg stance balance and Y-balance tests with eyes open are not valid measures of performance on a mountain bike, and should not be used to assess these populations. Our novel bicycle balance tests have adequate validity to be used as measures of performance in mountain bikers.

KW - Bicycling

KW - Control

KW - Proprioception

UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85140265085

U2 - 10.1016/j.smhs.2022.10.003

DO - 10.1016/j.smhs.2022.10.003

M3 - Article

C2 - 36600968

SN - 2666-3376

VL - 4

SP - 287

EP - 292

JO - Sports Medicine and Health Science

JF - Sports Medicine and Health Science

IS - 4

ER -

The ecological validity of traditional standing and novel bicycle balance and agility tests for predicting performance in mountain bikers

Abstract

Keywords

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this