A Review of the Validity and Reliability of Accelerometer-Based Metrics From Upper Back–Mounted GNSS Player Tracking Systems for Athlete Training Load Monitoring

Abstract

Abstract Dawson, L, Beato, M, Devereux, G, and McErlain-Naylor, SA. A review of the validity and reliability of accelerometer-based metrics from upper back–mounted GNSS player tracking systems for athlete training load monitoring. J Strength Cond Res 38(8): e460–e475, 2024—Athlete load monitoring using upper back–mounted global navigation satellite system (GNSS) player tracking is common within many team sports. However, accelerometer-based load monitoring may provide information that cannot be achieved with GNSS alone. This review focuses on the accelerometer-based metrics quantifying the accumulation of accelerations as an estimation of athlete training load, appraising the validity and reliability of accelerometer use in upper back–mounted GNSS player tracking systems, the accelerometer-based metrics, and their potential for application within athlete monitoring. Reliability of GNSS-housed accelerometers and accelerometer-based metrics are dependent on the equipment model, signal processing methods, and the activity being monitored. Furthermore, GNSS unit placement on the upper back may be suboptimal for accelerometer-based estimation of mechanical load. Because there are currently no feasible gold standard comparisons for field-based whole-body biomechanical load, the validity of accelerometer-based load metrics has largely been considered in relation to other measures of training load and exercise intensity. In terms of convergent validity, accelerometer-based metrics (e.g., PlayerLoad, Dynamic Stress Load, Body Load) have correlated, albeit with varying magnitudes and certainty, with measures of internal physiological load, exercise intensity, total distance, collisions and impacts, fatigue, and injury risk and incidence. Currently, comparisons of these metrics should not be made between athletes because of mass or technique differences or between manufacturers because of processing variations. Notable areas for further study include the associations between accelerometer-based metrics and other parts of biomechanical load-adaptation pathways of interest, such as internal biomechanical loads or methods of manipulating these metrics through effective training design.