ISSN 2415-3060 (print), ISSN 2522-4972 (online)
  • 30 of 32
УЖМБС 2022, 7(6): 207–212
Physical training and Sport. Medical and biological aspects of training athletes

Establishing of Upper Extremities Length of Students of Higher Education Institutions of Bukovyna Depending on the Sport Type

Karatieieva S. Yu. 1, Slobodian O. M. 1, Slobodian K. V. 2, Muzyka N. Ya. 3

The purpose of the study was to establish of upper limbs length of students of higher educational institutions of Bukovyna depending on the sport type with the further construction of forecasting model. Materials and methods. The research was conducted on 132 students of the first and second years of higher education institutions of Bukovyna aged from16 to 18. Of them, 86 (65.15%) were boys and 46 (34.85%) girls. The main group consisted of 92 (69.70%) students and the control group – 40 (30.30%) students. Among the students of the main group, there are 65 (70.65%) boys and 27 (29.35%) girls. The control group consisted of 21 (52.5%) boys and 19 (47.5%) girls. Students of the main group were engaged in the following sport types: football, volleyball, handball, basketball. Students of the control group did not additionally do sports, except for hours of physical education, in accordance with the curriculum. All students were subjected to an anthropometric study according to the method of V. V. Bunak modified by P. P. Shaparenkо. Anthropometric examination included determination of total and partial parameters. Results and discussion. According to the results of the study, that included the distribution of the length of the right and left upper limbs for gender, there was a significant difference in the average length of young boys and young girls in the main group. This is also evidenced by Welch's t-test: t (49.3) = – 7.253, p < 0.05. The result of the distribution of the length of the right and left upper limbs in the control group for gender also indicates that there was a significant difference in the length of the upper limb of young boys and young girls of the control group on average. This was also confirmed by Welch's t-test: t (25.971) = – 5.670, p < 0.05 (right upper extremity) and t (26.175) = – 5.754, p < 0.05 (left upper extremity). Taking into account the results of the distribution of the lengths of the upper limbs depending on the sport type, it shows that there was a significant difference in the average value of the length depending on the sport type. Since p = 0.25 < 0.05, the difference between the medians of the groups is statistically significant. When comparing the lengths of both upper limbs of the studied young boys and young girls, no significant difference in the average length of the right and left upper limbs was found t (255.92) = – 0.172, p = 0.864. Conclusion. By comparing the length of the right and left upper limbs of the studied students of the main group, depending on the sport type, there was a significant difference in the average value (football players have the smallest length of the upper limbs: right – 69.77 ± 2.0 cm, of them 70.39 ± 2.00 cm in young boys and 67.90 ± 2.00 cm in young girls, left – 70.28 ± 2.0 cm, of them 71.41 ± 2.00 cm in young boys and 68.72 ± 2.00 cm in young girls, while volleyball players have the largest: right – 76.20 ± 2.0 cm, of them 77.32 ± 2.00 cm in young boys and 74.22 ± 2.00 cm in young girls, and left – 77.00 ± 2.0 cm, of them 78.43 ± 2.00 cm in young boys and 75.92 ± 2.00 cm in young girls). A significant factor for the length of both upper limbs is height. A model for predicting the length of the upper limbs was derived: y = 0.422 * x, (where y – the length of the right upper limb, x – height)

Keywords: students, anthropometric parameters, upper extremities length

Full text: PDF (Ua) 270K

  1. Cullen S, Fleming J, Logue DM, O'Connor J, Connor B, Cleary J, et al. Anthropometric profiles of elite athletes. J Hum Sport Exerc. 2020;17(1):145-155. doi: 10.14198/jhse.2022.171.14
  2. Thomas D, Erdman K, Burke L. American College of Sports Medicine joint position statement. Nutrition and athletic performance. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2016; 48(3); 543-568. PMID: 26891166. doi: 10.1249/MSS.0000000000000852
  3. Aragon AA, Schoenfeld BJ, Wildman R, Kleiner S, Van Dusseldorp T, Taylor L, et al. International society of sports nutrition position stand: diets and body composition. J Int Soc Sports Nutr. 2017 Jun 14; 14:16. PMID: 28630601. PMCID: PMC5470183. doi: 10.1186/s12970-017-0174-y
  4. Perez AJ. Investigation: NFL improperly attempted to influence concussion research. USA Today Sports. 2016 May 23. Available from: /84787426/
  5. Gomez-Ezeiza J, Tam N, Torres-Unda J, Granados C, Santos-Concejero J. Anthropometric characteristics of top-class Olympic race walkers. J Sports Med Phys Fitness. 2019 Mar;59(3):429-433. PMID: 29687690. doi: 10.23736/S0022-4707.18.08363-9
  6. Budzhak VV. Biometriia [Biometrics]. Navch posib. Chernivtsi: Chernivetskyi natsionalnyi universytet; 2016. 272 p. [Ukrainian]
  7. Kozin S, Cretu M, Kozina Z, Chernozub A, Ryepko O, Shepelenko T, Sobko I., Oleksiuk M. Application closed kinematic chain exercises with eccentric and strength exercises for the shoulder injuries prevention in student rock climbers: A randomized controlled trial. Acta of Bioengineering and Biomechanics, 2021, 23(2).
  8. Kendall KL, Fukuda DH, Hyde PN, Smith-Ryan AE, Moon JR, Stout JR. Estimating fat-free mass in elite-level male rowers: a four-compartment model validation of laboratory and field methods. J Sports Sci. 2017 Apr;35(7):624-633. PMID: 27159216. doi: 10.1080/02640414.2016.1183802
  9. Logue D, Madigan SM, Delahunt E, Heinen M, Mc Donnell SJ, Corish CA. Low Energy Availability in Athletes: A Review of Prevalence, Dietary Patterns, Physiological Health, and Sports Performance. Sports Med. 2018;48(1):73-96. PMID: 28983802. doi: 10.1007/s40279-017-0790-3
  10. Karatieieva SYu, Slobodian OM, Moseychuk YuYu, Hauriak OD, Goy RS. Study of anthropometric and morphometric parameters in the training of athletes. Ukr Zh Med Biol Sportu. 2021;5(33):16-22. doi: 10.26693/jmbs06.05.016
  11. Karatieieva SYu, Slobodian OM, Honchar HI, Nazarevych VS, Slobodian KV, Korelianchuk AV. Establishment of types of the constitutions in students-athletes and in students-medicists with their further analysis. Wiad Lek. 2022;4(2):955-959. PMID: 35633324. DOI: 10.36740/WLek20220420106
  12. Karatieieva S, Slobodian O, Lukashiv T, Honchar H, Komar V, Kozlovska S. The determination of distal hip circumference in universities students depending on the sport type. Health, sport, rehabilitation, 2022; 8(3): 27-37 doi:
  13. Kozina ZhL, Bazilyuk TA, Boyko AG. Analysis of the structure of the integrated preparedness of qualified handballers using multidimensional analysis methods. Health, sport, rehabilitation, 2017; 3(2): 15-24. doi:10.34142/zenodo.1109904
  14. Mountjoy M, Sundgot-Borgen J, Burke L, Ackerman KE, Blauwet C, Constantini N, et al. International Olympic Committee (IOC) Consensus Statement on Relative Energy Deficiency in Sport (RED-S): 2018 Update. Int J Sport Nutr Exerc Metab. 2018 Jul 1;28(4):316-331. PMID: 29771168. doi: 10.1123/ijsnem.2018-0136
  15. Sánchez Muñoz C, Muros JJ, López Belmonte Ó, Zabala M. Anthropometric characteristics, body composition and somatotype of elite male young runners. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Jan 20;17(2):674. PMID: 31968680. PMCID: PMC7013868. doi: 10.3390/ijerph17020674
  16. Suydam SM, Cortes DH, Axe MJ. Semitendinosus tendon for ACL reconstruction: regrowth and mechanical property recovery. Orthop J Sports Med. 2017; 5:2-11. PMID: 28680900. PMCID: PMC5490845. doi: 10.1177/2325967117712944
  17. Sánchez Muñoz C, Zabala M. World and olympic mountain bike champions' anthropometry, body composition and somatotype. J Sports Med Phys Fitness. 2018; 58(6): 843-51. PMID: 28462576. doi: 10.23736/S0022-4707.17.07179-1
  18. Shaparenko PF. Antropometriia [Anthropometry]. Vinnytsia: Drukarnia Vinnytskoho derzhavnoho medychnoho universytetu im MI Pyrohova 2000:. 71 s. [Ukrainian]
  19. Kruskal WH. Wallis WA. Use of ranks in one-criterion variance analysis. J Am Stat Assoc. 1952; 47(260): 583-621. doi: 10.2307/2280779
  20. Conover W J, and Iman R L. Multiple-comparisons procedures. Informal report. 1979. United States. doi: 10.2172/6057803