Why the study?
To determine whether positional profiling is possible for national level ice hockey players by examining anthropometric characteristics and physiological performance.
There are significant physiological differences between forwards and defensemen in national level youth ice hockey players, suggesting positional profiling is possible.
May inform position-specific training in youth ice hockey; leaves open prospective validation for performance or injury outcomes.
Identifying talented players requires subjective, as well as objective assessments of playing ability and performance. The assessment of anthropometric characteristics, as well as general physiological performance can be used for player selection. The primary purpose of this study was to determine whether positional profiling is possible for national level ice hockey players by examining anthropometric characteristics and physiological performance. The study involved two ice-hockey teams, U18 and U23, in total of 49 athletes (32 forwards and 17 defensemen), members of the “Székelyföldi” Ice Hockey Academy (SZJA). Data collection was conducted in May 2020, at the SZJAs Medical and Methodological Center. Body height was determined including barefoot height (± 0.1 cm) using a wall mounted stadiometer. Body weight was measured with a standard scale. A standard incremental maximal oxygen uptake test was conducted in the laboratory by means of open-circuit spirometry and computerized instrumentation (CPET Cosmed, Italy) following the Bruce protocol. With the use of the descriptive statistics, we found no differences at the anthropometric characteristics between forwards and defensemen. Regarding the physiological characteristics, some possible differences were found for maximal- and absolute oxygen uptake rate. While our results from descriptive statistics show no significant differences between the two studied ice hockey position, based on the Mann-Whitney U test, considering all parameter values, we found that there were significant differences between the two groups within this sample number.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Czont et al. (2022) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: