The aims of this systematic review were to (a) examine the reliability of the reactive agility tests and (b) analyze the discriminatory validity of the agility tests. A literature search was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). We explored PubMed, SPORTDiscus, and Cochrane Plus databases looking for articles about agility in team sports. After filtering for article relevance, only 42 studies met the inclusion criteria; 37 of which assessed the reliability of agility tests and 22 assessing their validity. Reliability showed a high intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) in almost all studies (range 0.79-0.99) with the exception of 2 studies. In addition, other studies also assessed the reliability of decision time (ICC = 0.95), movement time (ICC = 0.92), and decision accuracy (ICC = 0.74-0.93), all of which exhibited acceptable reliability. Furthermore, these data show high discriminatory validity, with higher performance level players being faster than lower performance level players (mean = 6.4%, range = 2.1-25.3%), with a faster decision time (mean = 23.2%, range = 10.2-48.0%) with the exception of 1 study, and better decision accuracy (mean = 9.3%, range = 2.5-21.0%). Thus, it can be concluded that reactive agility tests show good reliability and discriminatory validity. However, most agility tests occur in simple contexts whereby only 2 possible responses are possible. Therefore, future research should consider creating more specific and complex environments that challenge the cognitive process of high-level athletes.
© Copyright 2021 The Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. National Strength & Conditioning Association. All rights reserved.