Test-Retest Reliability, Criterion-Related Validity, and Minimal Detectable Change of the Illinois Agility Test in Male Team Sport Athletes

Abstract

The purposes of this study were first to assess the reliability and criterion-related validity of the Illinois change of direction (COD) Illinois Agility Test (IAGT) and second to determine whether a relationship with power and speed exists. A total of 105 male team sport athletes participated in this investigation. Repeat measurements in 89 subjects out of the 105 were performed to assess the test-retest reliability and the 95% confidence interval (CI) of the difference in the score between paired observations (minimal detectable change [MDC]95) of the COD IAGT. The intraclass correlation coefficient and the SEM values for the COD IAGT test were 0.96 (95% CI, 0.85-0.98) and 0.19 seconds, respectively. The smallest worthwhile change (0.20 seconds) for the IAGT was greater than its SEM (0.19 seconds). The MDC95 value for the IAGT was 0.52 seconds. Criterion-related validity of the COD IAGT was assessed in the 105 subjects. They performed the COD IAGT and the T-test. Both tests were significantly correlated (r = 0.31 [95% CI, 0.24-0.39]; p < 0.05). The correlation between COD IAGT, acceleration, straight speed, and leg power was analyzed in all the 105 subjects. Pearson moment correlation revealed no association between acceleration and the COD IAGT. However, significant correlations were observed between the COD IAGT and leg power (r = -0.39 [95% CI, -0.26 to -0.44]; p < 0.05), and speed (r = 0.42 [95% CI, 0.37-0.51]; p < 0.05). When controlling for speed with partial correlation, the significant relationship between the COD IAGT and leg power disappeared. In conclusion, the COD IAGT seems to be a reliable and valid test, whose performance is significantly related to speed rather than to acceleration and leg power.

Reliability, Validity and Minimal Detectable Change of a New Multi-Change of Directionagility Test for Soccer Players

“…ICCs across the two trials in our study were .96 and .97 for NMAT and Ball-NMAT, respectively. These values were in the same range of relative reliability value indices reported in other agility tests (Haj-Sassi, Dardouri, Haj Yahmed, Gmada, Mahfoudhi, & Gharbi, 2009;Haj Sassi, Dardouri, Gharbi, Chaouachi, Mansour, Rabhi et al, 2011;Hachana, Chaabène, Nabli, Attia, Moualhi, Farhat et al, 2013). Haj-Sassi et al (2009) reported an ICC of .92 to .96 across two modified agility T-test trials in men and women physical education students.…”

“…Haj-Sassi et al (2009) reported an ICC of .92 to .96 across two modified agility T-test trials in men and women physical education students. In the same context, Hachana et al (2013) found an ICC of .96 across two Illinois agility run trials in 89team sports players. It is commonly accepted that an ICC over .9 is considered high for physiological field tests (Vincent, 1995); so, our results demonstrated a high reliability of both NAMT and Ball-NMAT.…”

“…In the present study, we found a high reliability of the NMAT with and without ball was high across the two measurement trials. Several recent studies usually investigated the reliability of field tests by using 2 commons indices including the ICC values and 95% LOA method (Haj-Sassi, Dardouri, Haj Yahmed, Gmada, Mahfoudhi, & Gharbi, 2009;Haj Sassi, Dardouri, Gharbi, Chaouachi, Mansour, Rabhi et al, 2011;Hachana, Chaabène, Nabli, Attia, Moualhi, Farhat et al, 2013). These studies considered the two methods as the most appropriate and objective for reliability assessment.…”

“…A number of tests have been purported to assess agility including the 505 agility test (Ellis, Gastin, Lawrence, Savage, Buckeridge, Stapff et al, 2000), T-test (Haj-Sassi, Dardouri, Haj Yahmed, Gmada, Mahfoudhi, & Gharbi, 2009), and the Edgren side step test (Harman, Garhammer, & Pandorf, 2000). Other tests commonly are used, such as Illinois agility test (Hachana, Chaabène, Nabli, Attia, Moualhi, Farhat et al, 2013). Nevertheless, it is generally accepted that many current tests used to measure agility performance within field based team-sports are not matched with known game-day movement characteristics .…”

A Step towards a Field Based Agility Test in Team Sports

“…Agility performance has predominantly been assessing the Change of Direction (COD) movement action in tests such as pro-agility shuttle [8], 505 change of direction test [9], change of direction speed test [10], Y step test [11] and Illinois test [12], that do not involve the assessment of perception [6] and action to a game specific stimulus. The named COD tests principally assess attacking agility actions which further limits their ecological validity in team sports as performance is depen-…”