Table 4 Characteristics and synthesis of the methodological validation studies based on the PICO scheme
From: Metabolic Power in Team and Racquet Sports: A Systematic Review with Best-Evidence Synthesis
Study (Year) | Population | Intervention | Comparison | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Castagna et al. [35] | 1200 male first division German, English, and Spanish soccer players (24.5 ± 0.8 years) | Data from 20 (out of 60) randomly selected official matches | Comparison of metabolic power and traditional running speed approach using a video camera system (25 Hz); parameters were distance covered at HI (≥ 16.0 km/h), HIR (≥ 18.0 ≤ 22.0 km/h), VHIR (≥ 22.0 km/h), HIAcc (≥ + 2 m/s2), VHIAcc (≥ + 3 m/s2), HIDec (≤ −2 m/s2), VHIDec (≤ −3 m/s2), MPHI (≥ 20.0 W/kg) as well as TD and AMP; use of modified equation for metabolic power analysis (Osgnach et al. [3]) | High inter-match variations (CV > 10%) for all parameters except TD, AMP, and MPHI; significant measurement bias (effect size = 11.67) between MPHI and HI distances; nearly perfect correlation (r = 0.93) between MPHI and HI; very large correlations between MPHI and TD (r = 0.84), HIDec (r = 0.73), and HIR (r = 0.87) as well as between AMP and HI (r = 0.73), TD (r = 0.85), VHIDec (r = 0.72), and HIDec (r = 0.76) |
Darbellay et al. [36] | 14 elite youth Swiss soccer players of unknown sex (17 ± 1 years) | Data from 13 official matches and 2 SSGs | Comparison of metabolic power and traditional running speed approach (fixed and individual speed zones) using a GPS (10 Hz); e.g., high intensity zone: 20.0–35.0 W/kg vs. 16.0–19.0 km/h; use of modified equation for metabolic power analysis (Osgnach et al. [3]) | Matches: significantly higher distance covered in intermediate and high-intensity zones for metabolic power compared to running speed methods (p ≤ 0.001) and significantly higher (individual speed) and lower (fixed speed) for very high-intensity zones (p ≤ 0.001); SSG: significantly higher distance in high and very high-intensity zones for metabolic power compared to speed methods (p ≤ 0.002) |
Dubois et al. [37] | 14 professional French rugby union players of unknown sex (24.1 ± 3.4 years) | Data from 5 official matches during European Challenge Cup | Comparison of metabolic power, traditional running speed, and heart-rate-based approach using a GPS (5 Hz interpolated to 15 Hz) and heart rate monitors; thresholds: > 20.0 W/kg, > 14.4 km/h, and 85% of HRmax; use of modified equation for metabolic power analysis (Osgnach et al. [3]) | Near perfect correlation between total distance (traditional) and estimated distance (metabolic power) (r = 0.98) and between high-speed running and high metabolic power distance (r = 0.93); percentage differences between traditional and metabolic power approach during high-intensity running (up to + 53%) |
Gaudino et al. [38] | 26 professional English soccer players of unknown sex (26 ± 5 years) | Data from 3 different SSGs (5 vs. 5, 7 vs. 7, 10vs10) (420 individual observations; median of 16 drills per player) | Comparison of metabolic power and traditional running speed approach using a GPS (15 Hz); thresholds: > 20.0 W/kg and > 14.4 km/; use of modified equation for metabolic power analysis (Osgnach et al. [3]) | Distance at high-metabolic power was significantly higher compared to high-speed running regardless of SSGs (99%, p < 0.001; effect size = 0.8); percentage of high-metabolic power was higher compared to high-speed running during all SSGs (p < 0.001; effect size = 1.9–2.8); differences decreased from 5vs5 to 10vs10 (p < 0.01; effect size = 0.6–1.0) |
Gaudino et al. [39] | 26 professional English soccer players of unknown sex (26 ± 5 years) | Data from a 10-week training period (638 individual observations; median of 24 training sessions per player) | Comparison of metabolic power and traditional running speed approach using a GPS (15 Hz); thresholds: > 20.0 W/kg and > 14.4 km/h as well as 3 different high-speed and high-metabolic power categories; use of modified equation for metabolic power analysis (Osgnach et al. [3]) | Distance at total high-metabolic power was significantly higher compared to total high-speed running (p < 0.001; effect size = 0.8); relation between both methods decreased as high-intensity distance increased (R2 = 0.43; p < 0.001) |
Goto and King [40] | 11 youth soccer players of unknown sex (16 ± 0.6 years) | 3 different pitch sized SSGs (975, 1980, 3900 m2) and a match each lasting 35 min; conducted 4 times during 6 weeks | Examination of difference between metabolic power and traditional running speed approach using a GPS (5 Hz interpolated to 15 Hz); thresholds: ≥ 20.0 W/kg and ≥ 15.5; use of modified equation for metabolic power analysis (Osgnach et al. [3]) | Distance at high-metabolic power was significantly higher compared to high-speed running in all SSG and match (p < 0.001; effect size = 1.3–1.9); differences decreased with increase in pitch size during SSGs (615–102%), difference in match was 145% |
Goto and Saward [41] | 110 professional youth Japanese soccer players from U13–U18 of unknown sex (12.2–18.7 years) | Data from 48 official league matches | Examination of age-related differences in running performance; comparison of metabolic power and traditional running speed approach using a GPS (5 Hz interpolated to 15 Hz); thresholds: ≥ 20.0 W/kg and ≥ 14.4 km/h; use of modified equation for metabolic power analysis (Osgnach et al. [3]) | Distance at high-metabolic power was significantly higher compared to high-speed running in all age-groups (p < 0.01; effect size = 0.49–0.61); percentage difference decreased with increasing age (p < 0.001; effect size = 0.63); moderate negative correlation between percentage difference and age (p < 0.001; r = −0.45) |
Hoppe et al. [42] | 12 professional German soccer players of unknown sex (26 ± 3 years) | Data from 5 pre-season matches; only data of completed halves were analyzed (total of 61 halves) | Examination of intraindividual variability of metabolic power using a GPS (10 Hz); comparison of variability of high metabolic power (≥ 20.0 W/kg), speed (≥ 15.5 km/h), acceleration (≥ + 3 m/s2), and deceleration (≤ −3 m/s2); use of modified equation for metabolic power analysis (Osgnach et al. [3]) | Variability of global metabolic power data (EE, EC, AMP; CV = 0.8–11.4%) was lower than high-intensity (high and peak metabolic power; CV = 6.1–50.0%); variability of high metabolic power (CV = 14.1 ± 3.5%) was comparable to high speed (17.0 ± 6.2%), acceleration (11.1 ± 5.1%), and deceleration (11.9 ± 4.5%) |
Lord et al. [43] | 20 sub-elite youth soccer players of unknown sex (19.1 ± 1.2 years) | 4 competitive matches and 3 field-based test sessions; (1) maximal straight-line running efforts: 400 m running track and efforts over 40, 100, and 400 m; (2) critical speed field test—straight line: 400 m running track and efforts over 1200, 2400, and 3600 m continuous running; (3) critical speed field test—shuttle running: 100 m straight line track and maximal shuttle-runs over 100, 400, and 1500 m | Examination of validity and reliability of maximal speed, maximal metabolic power, critical speed, and critical metabolic power using a GPS (15 Hz); differences therein during matches versus field-based maximal effort running tests; use of original equation for metabolic power analysis (di Prampero et al. [15]) | Validity: critical speed and critical metabolic power showed a good correlation (r = 0.843); critical speed (p = 0.066) and critical metabolic power (p = 0.271) showed no difference to shuttle-run data; Reliability (match): ICC was large (0.577) to nearly perfect (0.902) for speed and very large (0.701–0.863) for metabolic power data; CV was moderate to good for speed (3.8–5.6%) as well as metabolic power (3.9–7.8%) data |
Lord et al. [44] | 20 sub-elite youth soccer players of unknown sex (19.1 ± 1.2 years) | Data from 26 official matches (416 individual match samples) | Examination of match-to-match variations of match running performance (distances, maximal maintainable speed, and metabolic power) over 2–10 matches using a GPS (15 Hz); use of original equation for metabolic power analysis (di Prampero et al. [15]) | Match-to-match variations for maximal speed (CV = 4.9–7.0%) and maximal metabolic power (CV = 4.4–9.6%) were good to moderate |
Martinez-Cabrera and Núnez-Sánchez [45] | 38 professional Romanian soccer players of unknown sex (26.3 ± 3.9 years) | Data from 18 pre-season matches (over 4 years); total of 300 individual observations; only data of completed halves were analyzed; grouped according to playing position | Comparison of metabolic power and traditional running speed approach (fixed speed/metabolic power zones) using a GPS (15 Hz); e.g., 20.1–35.0 W/kg vs. 16.1–19.0 km/h; use of original equation for metabolic power analysis (di Prampero et al. [15]) | No differences were found between metabolic power and traditional running speed approach concerning high, medium, and low intensities in different playing positions using absolute values only |
Polglaze et al. [46] | 12 male elite Australian hockey players (25.5 ± 4.5 years) Two-part study, only 10 of 12 participants in part 2 | Two field tests (series of time trials, 3 min all-out shuttle running) Data from two international hockey matches | Comparison of critical metabolic power and critical speed using a GPS (10 Hz) as well as time above 85% HRmax; use of original equation for metabolic power analysis (di Prampero et al. [15]) | Correlation for critical metabolic power was very large in the two field tests (r = 0.754; p = 0.005); in matches, the correlation between time above 85% HRmax and critical metabolic power was very large (r = 0.867, p < 0.001) |
Scott et al. [47] | 26 male professional American rugby league players (26.4 ± 3.7 years) | Data from 25 official matches (346 individual observations); 30–15 intermittent fitness test four times during season to identify first and second ventilatory threshold as well as high metabolic power threshold; grouped according to playing position | Comparison of metabolic power approach and relative and absolute speed using a GPS (5 Hz interpolated to 15 Hz); thresholds: > 20.0 W/kg, 13.0 km/h (MIR), and 18.7 km/h (HIR); use of modified equation for metabolic power analysis (Osgnach et al. [3]) | Strong positive relationship between absolute and relative measures: V1IFT and MIR (r = 0.94), V2IFT and HIR (r = 0.94), and HPmetVT2 and HPmetTh (r = 0.93); HPmetVT2 was likely to almost certainly be lower than HPmetTh in all playing positions (effect size = 0.24–0.63); absolute MIR and high metabolic thresholds may over- or underestimate the load depending on the respective fitness of the individual |