Optimization of an Intermittent Finger Endurance Test for Climbers Regarding Gender and Deviation in Force and Pulling Time

Sport climbing performance determinants and functional testing methods: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Sport climbing is becoming incredibly popular both in the general population and among athletes. No consensus exists regarding evidence-based sport-specific performance evaluation; therefore, this systematic review is aimed at analyzing determinants of sport climbing performance and evaluation methods by comparing climbers of different levels.

METHODS

PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched up to December 20, 2022. Studies providing the self-reported climbing ability associated with different functional outcomes in groups of climbers of contiguous performance levels were eligible.

RESULTS

74 studies were finally included. Various methods have been proposed to evaluate determinants of sport climbing performance. Climbing-specific assessments were able to discriminate climbers of different levels when compared to general functional tests. Test validity resulted high for climbing-specific cardiorespiratory endurance as well as muscular-strength, -endurance, and -power; similarly, reliability was good except for cardiorespiratory endurance. Climbing-specific flexibility assessment resulted in high reliability but moderate validity, whereas balance showed low validity. Considerable conflicting evidence was found regarding anthropometric characteristics.

CONCLUSION

The present analysis identified cardiorespiratory endurance as well as muscular-strength, -endurance, and -power as determinants of sport climbing performance. In contrast, balance, flexibility, and anthropometric characteristics seem to count less. This review also proposes an evidence-based Functional Sport Climbing test battery for assessing performance determinants, which includes tests that have been identified to be valid, reliable, and feasible. While athletes and coaches should rely on evidence-based and standardized evaluation methods, researchers may design specific large-scale trials as a resource for providing additional, homogenous, and comparable data to improve scientific evidence and professionalism in this popular sport discipline.

Comparison of finger flexion strength and muscular recovery of male lead sport climbers across climbing classes

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to compare finger flexor strength (FS), finger flexor muscle recovery (FR), and forearm circumference (FC) across three different climbing classes in male lead sport climbers.

METHODS

A total of 37 male lead sport climbers were classified into low (LC), intermediate (IC), and advanced classes (AC) categories according to the International Rock Climbing Research Association (IRCRA) Scale. All participants measured FS three times for both open grip (OG) and crimp grip (CG). Following FS measurement, the FR was observed immediately after the all-out training. The FC was measured twice using an inelastic tape.

RESULTS

The FS differed significantly across climbing classes for both grip styles and hands, regardless of dominant hand, with the higher classes showing greater FS (all, p ≤ 0.001). FR was significantly higher in AC compared to IC and LC at 5 min (all, p ≤ 0.001), 10 min (all, p ≤ 0.005) and 15 min (all, p ≤ 0.005). The FC showed significant differences with climbing classes for both forearms.

CONCLUSION

Climbing classes are associated with differences in FS, with higher class corresponding to greater FS. Similarly, climbing classes are linked to FR and FC, with higher classes being associated with faster recovery and larger FC.

Validity of the Entralpi force plate in the assessment of finger flexor performance metrics in rock climbers

This study assessed the validity of the Entralpi force plate in the assessment of finger flexor performance in rock climbers. In addition to a static force evaluation, peak force, peak impulse, and total impulse were measured during 30 all-out performance trials by 15 participants, in which force during the trials was recorded simultaneously by the Entralpi and a Pasco force plate. Agreement between devices was assessed by a variety of statistical analyses, including intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), coefficient of variation (CV), and Bland-Altman analyses. The static force evaluation showed a mean relative error of 0.41% and excellent day-to-day reliability (ICC = 1; CV = 0.03%). Peak force, peak impulse, and total impulse from the performance trials demonstrated strong agreement (ICC ≥ 0.991, CV ≤ 1.9%, Bland-Altman mean bias ≤ 0.5%). These results illustrate that the Entralpi force plate provides accurate and reliable data for rock climbing related tasks at an affordable cost.

Physical performance testing in climbing-A systematic review

Due to the increasing popularity of climbing, the corresponding diagnostics are gaining in importance for both science and practice. This review aims to give an overview of the quality of different diagnostic testing- and measurement methods for performance, strength, endurance, and flexibility in climbing. A systematic literature search for studies including quantitative methods and tests for measuring different forms of strength, endurance, flexibility, or performance in climbing and bouldering was conducted on PubMed and SPORT Discus. Studies and abstracts were included if they a) worked with a representative sample of human boulderers and/or climbers, b) included detailed information on at least one test, and c) were randomized-controlled-, cohort-, cross-over-, intervention-, or case studies. 156 studies were included into the review. Data regarding subject characteristics, as well as the implementation and quality of all relevant tests were extracted from the studies. Tests with similar exercises were grouped and the information on a) measured value, b) unit, c) subject characteristics (sex and ability level), and d) quality criteria (objectivity, reliability, validity) were bundled and displayed in standardized tables. In total, 63 different tests were identified, of which some comprised different ways of implementation. This clearly shows that there are no uniform or standard procedures in climbing diagnostics, for tests on strength, endurance or flexibility. Furthermore, only few studies report data on test quality and detailed information on sample characteristics. This not only makes it difficult to compare test results, but at the same time makes it impossible to give precise test recommendations. Nevertheless, this overview of the current state of research contributes to the creation of more uniform test batteries in the future.