Metabolic Power in Team and Racquet Sports: A Systematic Review with Best-Evidence Synthesis

Abstract

Abstract Background In intermittent team and racquet sports, metabolic loads are rarely investigated as they are difficult to examine, e.g., by portable metabolic carts and lactate measures. However, determining the instantaneous metabolic power of intermittent running from acceleration and speed data is possible. Recently, this potential has gained more interest in research and practice due to the development of player tracking technologies that allow easy access to the required data. The aim of this review was to systematically investigate the validity and point out the evidence of this new approach for estimating metabolic loads in intermittent sports. To provide an in-depth understanding of this approach and its validity, the fundamental aspects of the underlying concept were also considered. Methods PubMed®, Cochrane Library, Web of Science™, and BISp-surf databases were included in the search conducted on March 1, 2021. Studies assessing physiological and methodological validation as well as conceptual studies of the metabolic power approach in intermittent sports players without diseases or injuries were deemed eligible. The quality assessment was implemented using a modified 12-item version of the Downs and Black checklist. Additionally, a best-evidence synthesis of the validation studies was performed to clarify the direction and strength of the evidence. Results Of 947 studies that were identified, 31 met the eligibility criteria of which 7 were physiological, 13 methodological validation, and 11 conceptual studies. Gold standards for validating the metabolic power approach were predominantly oxygen uptake with 6 and traditional running speed analysis with 8 studies for physiological and methodological validation, respectively. The best-evidence synthesis showed conflicting to strong and moderate to strong evidence for physiological and methodological validity of the approach, respectively. The conceptual studies revealed several modifications regarding the approach that need to be considered. Otherwise, incorrect implementation can occur. Conclusions Evidence of the physiological validity of the metabolic power approach ranged from conflicting to strong. However, this should be treated with caution as the validation studies were often partially implemented incorrectly as shown by the underlying concept studies. Moreover, strong evidence indicated that the approach is valid from a methodological perspective. Future studies must consider what the metabolic power approach can and cannot actually display.