Skip to main content
Journal of Physical Therapy Science logoLink to Journal of Physical Therapy Science
. 2016 Mar 31;28(3):891–895. doi: 10.1589/jpts.28.891

Comparison of basic physical fitness, aerobic capacity, and isokinetic strength between national and international level high school freestyle swimmers

Young-Hyeon Bae 1,2, Jae-Ho Yu 3, Suk Min Lee 4,*
PMCID: PMC4842460  PMID: 27134379

Abstract

[Purpose] This study aimed to compare basic physical fitness, aerobic capacity, and isokinetic strength between international and national level freestyle high school student swimmers. [Subjects and Methods] A total of 28 participants (14 international level swimmers and 14 national level freestyle high school student swimmers) with no known pathology were included. We used a cross-sectional study to examine three variables: basic physical fitness, aerobic capacity, and isokinetic strength. [Results] The mean values of these variables in the international level swimmers were higher than those in the national level swimmers. Swimmers are generally physically fit with a good competition record. [Conclusion] An appropriate training program, which considers specific individual characteristics is likely to have a positive impact on the improvement of total physical fitness, and subsequently, on the performance of the freestyle high school swimmer.

Key words: Aerobic capacity, Muscle strength, Swimmer

INTRODUCTION

Swimming requires muscle strength, as the arms perform the power to swing by water. Master level swimmers might use the overhead shoulder joint position up to 11,000 or more times in one week of training1). Swimming requires the repetitive nature of movements that can frequently lead to soft tissue micro-trauma in the shoulder joint2, 3). In addition, imbalance of muscle strength and flexibility loss has been implicated in shoulder joint injuries4); a major reason for the loss of time in training5). Other reports recognize that swimmers experience many back problems6, 7). There is little information on the role of trunk strength in swimming. As one’s arms swing in the water, the trunk provides a stable platform for the arm and leg motions, as evidenced by high electromyographic (EMG) muscle activity recorded in the back and abdominal muscles during swimming8). There is insufficient information regarding muscle strength and swimmer levels.

Previous studies have described the body composition and anthropometric characteristics in young swimmers9,10,11). These studies demonstrate the association between physical functions and the difference in swimming performance levels, the status of training experience, and age9,10,11). Swimmers of a young age have high muscle strength and aerobic capacity than non-swimmers of a comparable age. In additional, swimmers of a young age had properly weight of Body and fat-free mass and percent of body fat than older swimmers9,10,11). There are no reports on the aerobic capacity of swimmers according to swimming levels.

The relationship between basic physical fitness, isokinetic strength, and aerobic capacity in swimmers remains imprecise12, 13). Therefore, the purpose of this study was to compare basic physical fitness, aerobic capacity, and isokinetic strength between international and national level freestyle high school swimmers.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

We included a total of 28 participants (14 international level swimmers and 14 national level freestyle high school swimmers) with no known pathology in the study. We excluded those who were on any medication or likely to take any medication during the study period. All participants gave informed consent according to the method outlined by the institutional review board before study participation. This study was cross-sectional in nature and examined three variables.

All participants underwent an evaluation of basic physical fitness, isokinetic strength, and aerobic capacity. Following the evaluation, these three variables were compared between the international level swimmers and national level swimmers.

Body composition was analyzed using a portable eight-polar tactile-electrode impedancio-meter (InBody 3.0, Biospace, Gateshead, UK). This device was used to measure height (cm), weight (kg), fat mass (%), skeletal muscle mass (kg), and body mass index (BMI) (kg/m2). We performed the measurements under the following conditions: at least two hours after the last meal, without clothes on, without any metallic objects on the body, and after remaining in a standing position for a minimum of five minutes before the test.

Evaluation of physical fitness was performed using Helmas 2.0 (O2 Run, Inc., Seoul, Korea). The isometric test in this evaluation tested the strength of the back muscles. Concerning muscular endurance, the number of sit-ups performed in 30 seconds was assessed. For testing agility, a standing high jump was performed twice; we recorded the higher score. Trunk flexibility was tested with the sit and reach movement performed twice, during which we assessed the range of the forward movement of the trunk.

Peak torques in the shoulder, lumbar, and knee joints were measured to assess isokinetic muscle strength using the HUMAC®/NORM Cybex (CSMI) 770 dynamometer. We repeated the isokinetic strength test three times; we recorded the peak torque as the participant’s strength. We adopted low angular velocities (60°/second) to measure concentric isokinetic strength14, 15).

The sub-maximal graded exercise treadmill test consisted of a real-time recording 12-channel electrocardiography (Q5000, Quinton Instrument Co., Boston, MA, USA), a respiratory gas analyzer (QMC, Quinton Instrument Co.), an automatic blood pressure and pulse monitor (Model 412, Quinton Instrument Co.), and a treadmill (Medtrack ST 55, Quinton Instrument Co.) for evaluating aerobic capacity. The investigator evaluated the exercise heart rate (HR) and rating of perceived exertion (RPE) score at the end of each stage. We assessed the maximal oxygen uptake (VO2max) through a respiratory gas analyzer16).

The results are shown using descriptive statistics: mean and standard deviation (SD). For variables with a normal distribution, the independent t-test was used for comparison between the two groups. Data analysis was performed using SPSS version 21 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA). In all cases, the level of significance was set at p < 0.05.

RESULTS

The mean age, weight, height, BMI, fat-free mass, body fat mass, body muscle mass, and body fat % distribution of the international level swimmers and national level swimmers were not significantly different (Table 1).

Table 1. General characteristics and body composition of the participants.

Variable International swimmers National swimmers

Mean ± SD Mean ± SD
Age (years) 16.8 ± 0.8 17.4 ± 0.8
Height (cm) 177.4 ± 3.7 175.5 ± 3.1
Weight (kg) 73.7 ± 6.4 69.9 ± 3.2
BMI (kg/m2) 23.4 ± 1.3 22.7 ± 0.7
BFM (kg) 10.7 ± 1.9 10.3 ± 0.8
LBM (kg) 63.0 ± 4.8 60.7 ± 3.3
Muscle mass (kg) 59.4 ± 4.5 57.2 ± 3.2
BFP (%) 13.4 ± 1.7 13.3 ± 1.3

No significant difference between both the groups. BMI: body mass index, BFM: body fat mass, LBM: lean body mass, BFP: body fat percentage

The mean values of the strength of the back muscles, sit-ups, standing high jumps, and sit and reach movement in the international level swimmers were significantly higher than those in the national level swimmers (p<0.05) (Table 2).

Table 2. General characteristics and body composition of the participants.

Variable International swimmers National swimmers

Mean ± SD Mean ± SD
Back muscle strength (kg) 150.0 ± 9.5 139.1 ± 8.1*
Sit-up (frequency) 30.4 ± 3.6 27.0 ± 2.6*
Standing high jump (cm) 58.3 ± 7.7 52.6 ± 6.9*
Sit & reach (cm) 21.6 ± 4.2 18.1 ± 4.0*

*p < 0.05, significantly difference between both the groups

The international level swimmers scored higher on the peak torque in the shoulder joint, lumbar spine, and knee joint than the national level swimmers; there was a significant difference in trunk extension, knee extension, and internal and external shoulder rotation between the groups (p < 0.05) (Table 3).

Table 3. Comparison of isokinetic strength of trunk, knee, and shoulder between both the groups.

Variable International swimmers National swimmers

Mean±SD Mean±SD
Peak torque (ft-lbs) Trunk Flexion 137.2±13.3 127.0±11.8
Extension 147.3±14.1 135.5±12.5*
Knee Right Flexion 97.3±10.5 91.0±9.3
Extension 146.5±16.0 132.5±15.2*
Left Flexion 95.1±8.2 87.4±9.4
Extension 142.6±16.2 130.4±14.6*
Shoulder Right Internal Rotation 110.2±12.4 98.7±10.1*
External Rotation 78.6±9.3 70.0±8.2*
Left Internal Rotation 103.9±10.3 93.2±8.3*
External Rotation 74.7±9.8 65.0±8.0*

*p < 0.05, significantly difference between the both groups

The mean values of the VO2max, VO2max %, and body weight in the international level swimmers were significantly higher than those in the national level swimmers (p < 0.05) (Table 4).

Table 4. Comparison of aerobic capacity between both the groups.

Variable International swimmers National swimmers

Mean±SD Mean±SD
VO2max (ml/min) 4,244.0±591.0 3,722.1±587.1*
VO2max % Body weight(ml/min/kg) 57.6±5.8 53.2±4.9*

VO2max: Maximal oxygen uptake, *p < 0.05, significantly difference between both the groups

DISCUSSION

Swimming involves complicated, coordinated, high muscle fiber contractions, with 40–200 or more repetitions17). The positive relationship between muscle strength, VO2max, and stroke length are important observations made in previous studies. Muscle strength and VO2max are considered important features of a successful swimming performance18,19,20,21,22,23). Therefore, the purpose of this study was to compare basic physical fitness, aerobic capacity, and isokinetic strength between international level swimmers and national level swimmers.

Swimmers usually focus on improving performance by optimizing their swimming technique rather than increasing their muscle strength21, 24, 25). In our study, the mean values of basic physical fitness and isokinetic strength in the international level swimmers were higher than those in the national level swimmers. The associations among basic physical fitness, muscle strength, and performance become more evident at high swimming velocities, specifically in shorter duration competitions21, 24, 25). McMaster et al. showed an increase in strength of shoulder rotators in swimmers compared with that in non-swimmers5). Additionally, the trunk position controls an important role in supplying a stable platform from which the low and upper extremities can conduct powerful motions10). EMG data confirms that the rectus abdominis is one of the muscles most accountable for propulsion through swimming10). Moreover, EMG activity in the back and abdominal muscles is higher in competitive swimmers than in non-competitive swimmers during freestyle swimming10).

The international level swimmers scored higher than the national level swimmers on the peak torque in VO2max and VO2max % body weight in our study. VO2max in absolute and relative terms was significantly higher in the trained group compared to the untrained group. We expected this as swimming is an aerobic exercise that greatly taxes the oxygen transport system. This kind of training augments VO2max and, therefore, improves physical fitness16, 26). VO2max values were 31.5% higher, and the relative values were approximately 20% higher in the trained group compared to the untrained group; this was considered significant in previous studies16, 26).

In conclusion, freestyle swimmers are generally physically fit and seem to have a good competition record. Therefore, there is a need to consistently evaluate the physical performance of freestyle swimmers using a variety of assessment devices. In addition to this, an appropriate training program, which considers specific individual characteristics, is likely to have a positive impact on the improvement of physical fitness, and subsequently, on the performance of the freestyle swimmers.

Acknowledgments

This study was supported by Sahmyook University.

REFERENCES

  • 1.Wanivenhaus F, Fox AJ, Chaudhury S, et al. : Epidemiology of injuries and prevention strategies in competitive swimmers. Sports Health, 2012, 4: 246–251. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Ciullo JV, Stevens GG: The prevention and treatment of injuries to the shoulder in swimming. Sports Med, 1989, 7: 182–204. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Perry J: Anatomy and biomechanics of the shoulder in throwing, swimming, gymnastics, and tennis. Clin Sports Med, 1983, 2: 247–270. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Warner JJ, Micheli LJ, Arslanian LE, et al. : Patterns of flexibility, laxity, and strength in normal shoulders and shoulders with instability and impingement. Am J Sports Med, 1990, 18: 366–375. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.McMaster WC, Troup J: A survey of interfering shoulder pain in United States competitive swimmers. Am J Sports Med, 1993, 21: 67–70. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Bak K: [Injuries in swimmers. Locomotor system injuries in competitive swimmers]. Ugeskr Laeger, 1990, 152: 2220–2224. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Goldstein JD, Berger PE, Windler GE, et al. : Spine injuries in gymnasts and swimmers. An epidemiologic investigation. Am J Sports Med, 1991, 19: 463–468. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Lauer J, Figueiredo P, Vilas-Boas JP, et al. : Phase-dependence of elbow muscle coactivation in front crawl swimming. J Electromyogr Kinesiol, 2013, 23: 820–825. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Geladas ND, Nassis GP, Pavlicevic S: Somatic and physical traits affecting sprint swimming performance in young swimmers. Int J Sports Med, 2005, 26: 139–144. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Jürimäe J, Haljaste K, Cicchella A, et al. : Analysis of swimming performance from physical, physiological, and biomechanical parameters in young swimmers. Pediatr Exerc Sci, 2007, 19: 70–81. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Richardson J, Beerman K, Heiss C, et al. : Comparison of body weight and body fat classifications of competitive school-age club swimmers. J Am Diet Assoc, 2000, 100: 237–240. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Olbrecht J, Madsen O, Mader A, et al. : Relationship between swimming velocity and lactic concentration during continuous and intermittent training exercises. Int J Sports Med, 1985, 6: 74–77. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Sharp RL, Troup JP, Costill DL: Relationship between power and sprint freestyle swimming. Med Sci Sports Exerc, 1982, 14: 53–56. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Noh JW, Park BS, Kim MY, et al. : Analysis of isokinetic muscle strength for sports physiotherapy research in Korean ssireum athletes. J Phys Ther Sci, 2015, 27: 3223–3226. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Lin HT, Ko HT, Lee KC, et al. : The changes in shoulder rotation strength ratio for various shoulder positions and speeds in the scapular plane between baseball players and non-players. J Phys Ther Sci, 2015, 27: 1559–1563. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Mercier J, Vago P, Ramonatxo M, et al. : Effect of aerobic training quantity on the VO2 max of circumpubertal swimmers. Int J Sports Med, 1987, 8: 26–30. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Morouço P, Keskinen KL, Vilas-Boas JP, et al. : Relationship between tethered forces and the four swimming techniques performance. J Appl Biomech, 2011, 27: 161–169. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Cardelli C, Lerda R, Chollet D: Analysis of breathing in the crawl as a function of skill and stroke characteristics. Percept Mot Skills, 2000, 90: 979–987. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Chatard JC, Collomp C, Maglischo E, et al. : Swimming skill and stroking characteristics of front crawl swimmers. Int J Sports Med, 1990, 11: 156–161. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Chengalur SN, Brown PL: An analysis of male and female Olympic swimmers in the 200-meter events. Can J Sport Sci, 1992, 17: 104–109. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Costill DL, Kovaleski J, Porter D, et al. : Energy expenditure during front crawl swimming: predicting success in middle-distance events. Int J Sports Med, 1985, 6: 266–270. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Craig AB, Jr, Skehan PL, Pawelczyk JA, et al. : Velocity, stroke rate, and distance per stroke during elite swimming competition. Med Sci Sports Exerc, 1985, 17: 625–634. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Francaux M, Ramyead R, Sturbois X: Physical fitness of young Belgian swimmers. J Sports Med Phys Fitness, 1987, 27: 197–204. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Toussaint HM, Vervoorn K: Effects of specific high resistance training in the water on competitive swimmers. Int J Sports Med, 1990, 11: 228–233. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Hawley JA, Williams MM, Vickovic MM, et al. : Muscle power predicts freestyle swimming performance. Br J Sports Med, 1992, 26: 151–155. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Ribeiro JP, Cadavid E, Baena J, et al. : Metabolic predictors of middle-distance swimming performance. Br J Sports Med, 1990, 24: 196–200. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Journal of Physical Therapy Science are provided here courtesy of Society of Physical Therapy Science

RESOURCES