Share this Abstract

Rate this Abstract

Login to allow rating

Views

Login to allow views

Options


Abstract Details

Abstract Title

Project “Remar para o Futuro”: Anthropometric and Physical Comparisons Between Selected Students and Their Reference Population.

Abstract Theme

Sport development

Type Presentation

Poster

Abstract Authors

Presenter Aline Xavier Tuchtenhagen - Universidade Federal de Pelotas (ESEF) - BR
Marcelo dos Santos Vaz - Universidade Federal de Pelotas (ESEF) - BR
Oguener Tissot - Universidade Federal de Pelotas (ESEF) - BR
Verônica Diedrich - Universidade Federal de Pelotas (ESEF) - BR
Mariana Alvariz Lopes - Universidade Federal de Pelotas (ESEF) - BR
Eraldo dos Santos Pinheiro - Universidade Federal de Pelotas (ESEF) - BR
Fabrício Boscolo Del Vecchio - Universidade Federal de Pelotas (ESEF) - BR

Presentation Details

Poster Exhibition Site (Local): Red - 1        Date: 1 September        Time: 8am to 7pm        Presenter: Aline Tuchtenhagen

Abstract Resume

Background: Determination and detection of people with favorable profiles to competitive sports practice has been considered in various initiatives. Objective: To
compare anthropometric and physical variables between selected and not selected peoples for the project "Remar para o Futuro", from Pelotas, RS.


Methods: The study involved 224 students from four schools. They were evaluated about anthropometry, with body mass measurements (BM in kg), height (m) - with which were calculated
body mass index (BMI) and body surface (BS) = armspan (cm) and trunk-cephalic height (cm). It were evaluated the lower limbs power with horizontal jump (cm) and the performance in 30s specific test in
rowing ergometer. Two way ANOVA considered age group (up to 12 years, 13-14 years, 15 years or older) and outcome (selected [SEL] versus non-selected [NSEL]), and were weighted by sex.


Results: Of the 224 schools evaluated, 106 were girls and 118 were boys (χ²=0.64; p=.42). About the age groups, 36 were until 12 years, 109 were between 13 and 14 years and 79 were 15
or older (χ²=36.06; p>.001). The average age was 14±1.5 years, with no differences between genders (p=.93) and between selected and non-selected (p = .71). For BM, was found no differences considering
genders (F=0.57; p=.45), but between outcomes (p<.001) and groups (p<.001), with the youngest being lighter than oldest (53±2.3 kg vs. 62±1.5kg) and selected were heavier (62±2.7 kg vs. 54.3±1,18kg).
In height, differences were found between gender (p<.001), groups (p <.001) and outcome (SEL=1.68±0.01 m and NSEL=1.58±0.07 m, p <.001). In armspan, differences were found between genders (p=.002),
groups (p<.001) and outcomes (SEL=1.7±0.02m and NSEL = 1.58±0.08 m; p<.001). For trunk-cephalic height, differences were found between groups (p<.001) and outcomes (SEL = 1.29±0.04 m and NSEL =
1.25±0,09nm, p <.001). For BMI were not observed differences between genders (p=.09) and outcomes (p=.22), but between groups (p=.02), that was not confirmed in the univariate analysis (p=.16). On the
other hand, concerning BS, were found no differences between genders (p=.15), but between groups (p<.001) and outcome (SEL = 2.40±0.26 and NSEL = 2.22± 0,33, p<.001). In the horizontal jump,
differences were found in gender (F=87.43, p<.001), groups (F=4.42; p=.013) and outcomes (SEL = 157.82±27.47 and NSEL = 146,9±27.46; F=7.56, p=.006). To the distance in 30s rowing ergometer were found
differences for sex, group and outcome (p<.001), SEL and NSEL covered, respectively, 114±13m and 109 ± 19m, the maximum power measurements were 261±114W to SEL and 224±91W to NSEL, and mean power was
163±62W to SEL and 45±56W to NSEL. Peak power relative to body mass showed no differences between groups (p>.05) and outcomes (p>.05), and the mean showed no differences between outcomes (p>.05).


Conclusions: Participants selected to compose the "Remar para o futuro" team are taller and heavier, exhibit greater armspan and BS. They also showed better performance in lower limbs
power test and in the rowing ergometer.


Comment this abstract (0 comments)