Impact of Functional Training on Functional Movement and Athletic Performance in College Dragon Boat Athletes

unctional training has become a popular training method in different sports, yet limited studies have focused on paddle sports. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of functional training on functional movement and athletic performance in college dragon boat athletes. A total of 42 male athletes were divided into 2 groups: a functional training (FT) group (n = 21, 21 1.47 years ) and a regular training (RT) group (n = 21, 22 1.50 years ). The FT group participated in an 8-week (16-session) functional-training program, while the RT group trained with strength-training sessions. Functional movement screen (FMS), Y-balance test (YBT) and athletic performance evaluations were conducted before and after the

a functional training (FT) group (n = 21, 21 1.47 years ) and a regular training (RT) group (n = 21, 22 1.50 years ). The FT group participated in an 8-week (16-session) functional-training program, while the RT group trained with strength-training sessions. Functional movement screen (FMS), Y-balance test (YBT) and athletic performance evaluations were conducted before and after the intervention. Repeated measure ANOVA andt-test evaluations were employed to examine differences for both groups. The FT group was signi cantly improved in FMS scores (F = 0.191,p< 0.001) and YBT scores (F = 2.59,p= 0.027), and it also showed signi cantly improved muscular tness (pull-ups: F = 0.127,p< 0.001; push-ups: F = 1.43,p< 0.001) and rowing speed (F = 4.37,p= 0.004). It is recommended to include functional training as a part of training and routine exercise, as it appears to be an effective way of improving FMS and athletic performance in paddle sports. Keywords:functional training; athletic performance; dragon boat; athletes 1. Introduction In Asia-Paci c, dragon boating has progressed from a leisure festival event to a social and competitive sport [1]. It has been acknowledged as an international competitive team-based water sport [2]. Winning a high-level tournament in dragon boat racing requires proper paddling technique and posture. A boat that is moved by paddling force is also affected by stroke movement [3]. In addition, because training and competition are physically demanding, incorrect positions and training loads are more likely to increase the risk of injury [4]. Even though there are many different types of training, including aerobic, concurrent, and strength training, functional training is thought to be able to enhance athletic perfor- mance by enhancing core strength, balance, coordination, and movement patterns [5,6]. Early functional training was used in physical therapy and focused on the rehabilitation of the elderly or those with medical conditions [7–10]. Over the years, functional training has developed rapidly, with a trend shifting to athletics areas that focus on performance and injury reduction [11,12]. Functional training can improve power transmission and stabilize Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health2023,20, 3897.

therapy and focused on the rehabilitation of the elderly or those with medical conditions [7–10]. Over the years, functional training has developed rapidly, with a trend shifting to athletics areas that focus on performance and injury reduction [11,12]. Functional training can improve power transmission and stabilize Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health2023,20, 3897.

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health2023,20, 3897 2 of 11 body movement during paddle actions [13]. Compared to rowing and kayaking, dragon boat racing in at water and the unilateral movement of transferring power are uneven, which can affect performance and cause various sports injuries. Therefore, it is vital to enhance functional movement and maintain stability for improving paddling technique (catch, drive, and recovery) [3]. Unlike traditional strength training, which is theoretically focused on individual muscles or muscle groups, functional training is not focused on speci c muscles but rather on movement patterns, stability, and strength [14]. Functional training also emphasizes body movement as a whole that engages with core strength, multidimensional, and multiplane movement. This training program also follows a pro- gressive principle, from basic to complex, from normal function to speci c function [7,15]. Furthermore, it is based on functional movement screen (FMS) evaluations that examine movement qualities and weaknesses [5]. In addition, athletic performance is evaluated as a reference for customizing functional exercises [6]. Several studies have applied functional training to enhance performance across dif- ferent sports [16–22]. A systematic review concluded that functional training improved athletic performance and tness [12]. Moreover, athletic tness is considered a critical and fundamental competence for evaluating competitive ability. Studies have found that athletic performance and functional training are positively correlated [18,19,23]. Athletic perfor- mance can also be improved through athletic tness and sport performance[18,24–27] . To achieve training ef ciency, purposeful and systematic training determined under a series of functional and tness pro les can build a successful team [6]. Dragon boat races range from 200 m to 2000 m, and the two most popular race distances in these events are 200 m and 500 m at the international level. Developing successful training plans for different race distances should be based on the aerobic and anaerobic energy requirements of each distance [28]. Thus, the training program in this study aims to increase the maximal energy capacities in 200 m and 500 m races. Numerous studies on the effect of functional training have shown improved functional movement and sports performance in

Developing successful training plans for different race distances should be based on the aerobic and anaerobic energy requirements of each distance [28]. Thus, the training program in this study aims to increase the maximal energy capacities in 200 m and 500 m races. Numerous studies on the effect of functional training have shown improved functional movement and sports performance in physical education students, soccer players, and a variety of athletes [16,19,21,29,30]. Given the signi cance of stability and mobility in the physical performance of rowing sports and the paucity of data on the in uence of functional training on college paddlers, this study hypothesizes that an 8-week functional training program can improve the FMS and athletic performance of college dragon boat athletes. We also expect to provide recommendations and directions for coaches to conduct well-rounded functional programs. 2. Materials and Methods 2.1. Study Design and Participants This study was a controlled, nonrandomized trial designed to assess whether functional training could improve the levels of FMS and athletic performance in dragon boat athletes. A total of 44 male dragon boat athletes were recruited from two universities in Macau SAR, China. Due to the COVID-19 epidemic, all subjects did not engage in trainings for more than three months and did not train using functional training before the experiment. Two participants from both group were eliminated in the process of the study (Figure). All athletes competed in 200 and 500 m races in the university category of the International Dragon Boat Competition. Participants were divided into two groups: the functional train- ing (FT, n = 21, 21 1.47 years) group and the regular training (RT,n = 21, 22 1.50 years ) group. A questionnaire was used to analyze the demographic background of participants. Voluntary participants were invited to participate and provided written consent after learning about the process and risks of the study.

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health2023,20, 3897 3 of 11Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2023, 20, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 of 11 The inclusion criteria for the study were as follows: (1) college dragon boat athlete; (2) male; and (3) no past sustained musculoskeletal surgery of any kind. Subjects who met the following criteria were excluded: physically restricted or medically restricted (Figure 1). This research was approved by the Ethics Committee for research involving human participants of the University of Macau (SSHRE21-APP047-FED) and was conducted according to the Declaration of Helsinki. Figure 1. Flow chart of the experiment design. 2.2. Functional-Training Program A trial period was arranged for the FT and RT groups to present the training method, for demonstration, and for movement familiarization. Both groups continued twice a week on nonconsecutive days for eight weeks (16 sessions). Two trained professionals executed the training. As part of the functional-training program, exercises were included that complemented the multi-plane and multi-joint movements that are used in dragon boat strokes. Additionally, the functional-training program focused on functional Figure 1.Flow chart of the experiment design. The inclusion criteria for the study were as follows: (1) college dragon boat athlete; (2) male; and (3) no past sustained musculoskeletal surgery of any kind. Subjects who met the following criteria were excluded: physically restricted or medically restricted (Figure). This research was approved by the Ethics Committee for research involving human participants of the University of Macau (SSHRE21-APP047-FED) and was conducted ac- cording to the Declaration of Helsinki. 2.2. Functional-Training Program A trial period was arranged for the FT and RT groups to present the training method, for demonstration, and for movement familiarization. Both groups continued twice a week on nonconsecutive days for eight weeks (16 sessions). Two trained professionals executed the training. As part of the functional-training program, exercises were included that complemented the multi-plane and multi-joint movements that are used in dragon boat strokes. Additionally, the functional-training program focused on functional movement, stability, mobility, and core strength (Table). Consequently, these exercises were designed based on the literature and previous functional training, as well as

sessions). Two trained professionals executed the training. As part of the functional-training program, exercises were included that complemented the multi-plane and multi-joint movements that are used in dragon boat strokes. Additionally, the functional-training program focused on functional movement, stability, mobility, and core strength (Table). Consequently, these exercises were designed based on the literature and previous functional training, as well as taking into account the results of the FMS test and other relevant tness measurements [6,7,19,25,26,30–32], and were set based on functional-training principles [6,7,32]: (1) from primary to functional;

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health2023,20, 3897 4 of 11 (2) from single-joint to multiple-plane stages; and (3) from training multiple muscles to improving whole-body function. Table 1.Functional-training program. Category Phase 1 (Weeks 1–2) Phase 2 (Weeks 3–4) Phase 3 (Weeks 5–8) Static stretch, dynamic stretch Upper Explosive push-up Single-leg push-up Single-leg push-up (MB) Low kneeing chop Standing chop Multidirection chop Throw (MB) Side throw (MB) Multidirection throw (MB) Rowing (RB) Single-arm rowing (RB) Side bridge rowing (RB) Core Plank Single-leg plank Single-leg plank (BB) Mountain climber Cross-body mountain climber Mountain climber (BB) Russian twist Russian twist (MB) Russian twist (BB and MB) Dead bug Dead bug (BB) Dead bug with pause (BB) Lower Squat (RB) Squat (BB) Single-leg squat Lunge Single-leg lunge Lunge jump Recovery Note: RB, resistance band; MB, 4 Kg medicine ball; BB, BOSU ball. The FT group (n = 21) participated in land-based functional training, while the RT group (n = 21) performed a land-based warm-up and regular strength exercises (e.g., free weight training) before practicing in the water. The intervention consisted of 3 phases (weeks 1–2, weeks 3–4, and weeks 5–8), with 60 min per session (2 sessions per week) divided into an initial 10 min of dynamic stretching, 40 min of functional training, and 10 min of recovery. Every functional-training session consisted of ten exercises executed in three sets of 16–20 repetitions with a rest period of 50–60 s between sets. The number of repetitions was evaluated based on the training level and intensity. Functional movement capacity was developed using body weight, elastic resistance bands, medicine balls, and BOSU balls to maintain training intensity. The intensity of the training program was monitored by heart rate and the rated perceived exertion (RPE) scale [33,34]. A Polar OH1 heart rate monitor was utilized to determine the instance training loads [35] and intensity levels [36]. The average heart rates during the training were recorded at 142 6.2 bpm (Phase 1), 147 6.8 bpm (Phase 2), and 149 6.4 bpm (Phase 3). The rated perceived exertion scale was used to evaluate subjective perspective about the training intensity on

Polar OH1 heart rate monitor was utilized to determine the instance training loads [35] and intensity levels [36]. The average heart rates during the training were recorded at 142 6.2 bpm (Phase 1), 147 6.8 bpm (Phase 2), and 149 6.4 bpm (Phase 3). The rated perceived exertion scale was used to evaluate subjective perspective about the training intensity on a 10-point scale from 0 to 10 [34]. The average RPE values were recorded at 6.9 1.3 (Phase 1), 7.5 1.6 (Phase 2), and 7.8 1.7 (Phase 3). The program intended to maintain intensity between moderate and hard levels. 2.3. Evaluation The evaluation was conducted by trained surveyors. An anthropometric analysis and body composition were measured using bioelectrical impedance (Inbody 270 model) [37]. Functional moments were measured using FMS, which evaluated individual movement function, de ciency, stability, and asymmetry. The FMS evaluation consisted of 7 movement pattern tests, including functional movement (deep squat, hurdle step, and in-line lunge), fundamental mobility (shoulder mobility and active straight-leg raise), fundamental core strength (trunk push-up), and fundamental core stability (rotary stability) [13]. The scoring mechanism used a standard 0–3 ordinal scale to grade the quality of a movement in compliance with a standard [38] and could receive a total score of between 0 and 21 points. The Y-balance test (YBT) measured dynamic balance by calculating the absolute reach distance in three directions, as well as the comprehensive movement coordination of all domains of movements, including strength, core stability, and the motion range of a subject [39,40].

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health2023,20, 3897 5 of 11 Athletic performance was measured by the following: (1) muscle strength and en- durance (handgrip, push-ups, and pull-ups), with a handgrip test measuring the maximum grip for each hand [41], push-ups referring to the maximum number of push-ups com- pleted within one minute [42], and pull-ups referring to the maximum number of pull-ups completed at one time [43]; (2) power, as evaluated by a standing long jump with the total jumping distance [44]; (3) exibility, as tested by a sit-and-reach exercise that reached forward to the maximum distance [45]; (4) agility, as measured by a shuttle run that was repeated four times over a distance of 10 m [46]; (5) speed, as measured by a 30 m sprint that reached maximum speed within the distance [47]; and (6) rowing speed, as evaluated by rowing 200 m on an indoor rowing ergometer [48]. 2.4. Statistical Analysis Statistical analyses were carried out using excel version 2019 and SPSS version 27.0. The collected data were presented ass mean standard deviation (SD), and a signi cance level ofp< 0.05 was established At-test was employed to assess differences in baseline characteristics between the FT and RT groups. Moreover,t-test and two-way repeated ANOVA evaluations were conducted to determine the differences in the vitals measured within and between the pre- and post- intervention protocols. Cohen's effect sizes were calculated for the differences between the FT and RT groups; the effect sizes (ESs) were interpreted as “small” (0.2–0.49), “medium” (0.5–0.79), and “large” (>0.8) [49]. In this study, all coef cients were accepted as statistically signi cant at 95% (p< 0.05). The sample size analysis was calculated utilizing G*power calculation [50]. This study was performed with a moderate effect size of 0.5, an alpha error of 0.05, and a desired power (1-ß error) of 0.95. 3. Results A total of 44 individuals were recruited for this study, two individuals were eliminated. The remaining 42 individuals were divided into two groups. No signi cant difference between the two groups were identi ed in the characteristics and anthropometric factors prior to the

of 0.5, an alpha error of 0.05, and a desired power (1-ß error) of 0.95. 3. Results A total of 44 individuals were recruited for this study, two individuals were eliminated. The remaining 42 individuals were divided into two groups. No signi cant difference between the two groups were identi ed in the characteristics and anthropometric factors prior to the experiment, including age, height, weight, BMI, body fat, and muscle mass (Table). Neither group reported side effects during or after the experiment. Table 2.Athlete characteristics (n = 42).FT Group (n = 21) RT Group (n = 21) Pre Post Pre Post Age 21 1.47 22 1.50 Height 174.7 5.32 173.9 6.24 Weight 71.7 6.14 71.9 5.52 70.6 8.76 70.5 8.82 Body Mass Index 23.5 2.26 23.7 2.12 23.3 2.27 23.3 2.25 Skeletal Muscle Mass 33.4 3.31 33.6 3.29 33.3 3.40 33.2 3.56 Percent Body Fat17.5 4.60 17.6 4.20 16.3 6.36 16.6 6.56 FMS, YBT, and athletic performance parameters were analyzed witht-test and two-way repeated measure ANOVA evaluations. The FT group signi cantly increased (F = 0.191, p< 0.001), while the RT group slightly raised in FMS scores. The FT group found signi cant differences in two subsections of FMS: active leg raises (F = 2.84,p= 0.020) and trunk push-ups (F = 0.144,p =0.021). After the intervention, functional movement (deep squat, hurdle step, and in-line lunge), fundamental mobility (shoulder mobility), and fundamental core stability (rotary stability) in the FT group increased (Table). The effect size for the FMS scores was 0.78, while that for active leg raises was 0.63 and that for trunk push-ups was 0.52.

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health2023,20, 3897 6 of 11 Table 3.YBT and FMS data from FT and RT groups. Parameters Test Group p(Between Groups) h 2 YBT FT (n = 21) p RT (n = 21) p YBT scores Pre 92.2 5.60 0.027 * 96 4.09 0.356 0.109 0.51 Post 96.6 4.88 97.3 4.93 YBT-Left Pre 91.92 5.78 0.008 * 95.99 4.58 0.805 0.185 0.48 Post 96.55 5.64 96.35 4.98 YBT-Right Pre 92.46 5.97 0.196 95.95 4.14 0.130 0.07 0.29 Post 96.69 4.42 98.19 5.21 Functional Movement FMS scores Pre 14.81 1.30 <0.001 ** 15.48 1.37 0.260 0.665 0.78 Post 16.86 1.28 15.90 1.04 Deep Squat Pre 2.33 0.58 0.776 2.19 0.51 0.358 0.426 0.28 Post 2.38 0.50 2.33 0.48 Hurdle Step Pre 2.43 0.50 0.367 2.38 0.59 0.780 0.475 0.22 Post 2.57 0.50 2.43 0.51 In-Line Lunge Pre 2.19 0.60 0.270 2.19 0.60 0.771 0.585 0.32 Post 2.38 0.50 2.44 0.44 Shoulder Mobility Pre 2.14 0.73 0.147 2.24 0.59 0.796 0.851 0.25 Post 2.43 0.51 2.29 0.64 Active Leg Raise Pre 1.71 0.46 0.021 * 2.24 0.70 0.814 0.101 0.63 Post 2.29 0.56 2.19 0.60 Trunk Push-up Pre 2.14 0.48 0.020 * 2.29 0.46 0.213 0.706 0.52 Post 2.71 0.46 2.48 0.51 Rotary Stability Pre 1.86 0.36 0.088 1.95 0.38 1.000 0.813 0.23 Post 2.10 0.30 1.95 0.50 Note: FT, functional training; RT, regular training. Mean standard error; level of signi cance: *p< 0.05 and **p< 0.001. The YBT was calculated based on the maximum reach in the anterior, posteromedial, and posterolateral directions. YBT scores were signi cantly improved (F = 2.59,p =0.027), and the left stance limb of the YBT was signi cantly increased (F = 1.82,p =0.008) in the FT group. In terms of athletic performance, the selected parameters are presented in Table. Those of the FT group were signi cantly improved in push-ups (F = 0.127,p< 0.01), pull- ups (F = 1.43,p< 0.01), and rowing speed (F = 4.37,p =0.004). Agility (p< 0.05), speed (p =0.054), and power (p =0.009) were found to be signi cantly different between the FT and RT groups (Table). Medium-to-large

This study evaluates the effects of functional training on movement and performance in college dragon boat athletes.