HealthyLiKT-Fence RCTNCT06781268
Life Kinetic Training Enhances Physical and Cognitive Skills in Young Fencers
A study testing Life Kinetic Training in people with Healthy, run by Hellenic Naval Academy at 1 site in Greece.
Trial summary
The purpose of this study was to examine whether Life Kinetic (LK) exercises could improve balance, agility, jumping performance, proprioception, and cognitive functions in recreationally active preadolescents participating in fencing. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 10 to 12 yearsHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Healthy
- What is being tested?
- Life Kinetic Training
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 22 participants
- Where
- 1 siteGreece
- Study dates
- 27 Feb 2024to 15 Sep 2024
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 10 to 12 years
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Child
Who may be able to join
- Preadolescents aged between 10 and 12 years. Recreationally active in fencing and registered with the same athletic club. Healthy participants with no chronic illnesses, musculoskeletal injuries, or physical limitations in the last six months.
- No use of medication within six months prior to the study. Written informed consent provided by the participants and their parents or guardians.
Who cannot join
- History of chronic illnesses or conditions that could interfere with physical activity (e.g., asthma, cardiovascular issues).
- Any injury or physical limitation in the last six months that could impact performance.
- Use of medication that could affect physical or cognitive performance within six months before the study.
- Participants outside the specified age range (10-12 years). Lack of parental or participant consent.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: Impact of Life Kinetic Training on Balance, Agility, Jumping, Proprioception, and Cognitive Function in Preadolescent Recreational Fencing Athletes: a Randomized Controlled Trial
The purpose of this study was to examine whether Life Kinetic (LK) exercises could improve balance, agility, jumping performance, proprioception, and cognitive functions in recreationally active preadolescents participating in fencing. It specifically aimed to answer if LK training would lead to significant enhancements in these physical and cognitive attributes compared to a control group.
Read the detailed description
This study evaluated the effects of Life Kinetic (LK) training on balance, agility, jumping performance, proprioception, and cognitive functions in preadolescent recreational fencers. A total of 22 participants, aged 11.6 ± 1.2 years, were randomly assigned to either the experimental group, which performed LK exercises twice weekly for eight weeks, or the control group, which continued their regular fencing activities. The LK exercises combined physical and cognitive tasks to stimulate neuroplasticity and improve overall athletic and mental performance. Key metrics included agility, vertical jump, star balance, Stroop test, and proprioception assessments.
- Conditions
- Healthy
- Being tested
- Life Kinetic Training
- Keywords
- Children, Life kinetic, Motor skills, Exercise, Physical fitness
- Medical subject headings
- Motor Activity
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Life Kinetic TrainingBehavioural
Combination of cognitive and physical exercises aimed at improving neuroplasticity, agility, balance, and cognitive functions.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Life Kinetic Training Group | Experimental | Participants in this group engaged in Life Kinetic (LK) exercises twice a week for eight weeks. The training program combined physical and cognitive tasks designed to enhance neuroplasticity, improve balance, agility, jumping performance, proprioception, and cognitive functions. The exercises included activities that stimulated mental and physical coordination, aimed at improving overall athletic and mental performance. Receives: Behavioral: Life Kinetic Training |
| Control group | No intervention | Participants in the control group continued their usual recreational fencing training without additional intervention. To match the exposure of the experimental group, they engaged in structured, low-intensity activities unrelated to the objectives of Life Kinetic Training. These activities included light stretching, basic coordination drills, and non-cognitive motor tasks, conducted at the same frequency and duration as the experimental sessions (twice per week for one hour). These activities were designed to simulate a training environment while lacking the cognitive and motor integration components central to the intervention. At the end of the study, participants were fully debriefed about the nature and purpose of their activities, including the rationale for the placebo-like design, as part of the ethical protocol. |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Counter Movement Jump Measurement
The counter movement jump (CMJ) was assessed utilizing the OptoJump Next system (Microgate, Bolzano, Italy). After a self-administered warm-up session, participants performed 3 trials of the counter-movement jump without arm swings, followed by a one-minute rest period, after which they completed the actual CMJ test. Each participant completed three repetitions of the CMJ without arm swings, and the highest result in centimeters (jumping height) was documented as the primary outcome measure. The OptoJump, a dual-beam optical apparatus, quantifies contact and flight durations during jump sequences (or individual jumps). Flight time (tair) was employed to determine the elevation of the body's center of gravity.
Measured: 8 weeks
Stroop Color and Word Test
A Stroop test comprising three distinct conditions was employed (Scarpina and Tagini, 2017). Each condition featured 60 stimuli, arranged with 6 items per line on a 21.5 × 29 cm sheet of paper. In the initial condition, referred to as the reading condition, participants were required to read words printed in black ink, which included the names of colors such as red, green, blue, and yellow. In the second condition, known as the naming condition, participants were instructed to identify the colors of various rectangles. In the third condition, termed the interference condition, participants were required to name the color of the ink used to print the words, while disregarding the semantic content of the words themselves, as they were incongruent with the ink color (e.g., the word "green" printed in red ink). This condition specifically tested the participants' inhibitory control. Across all conditions, participants were instructed to respond as quickly as possible while minimizing erro
Measured: 8 weeks
Agility T-test
The T-test was conducted as previously described (Semenick, 1990). Four cones were positioned in a T formation, with one cone located 9.14 meters from the starting cone and two additional cones placed 4.57 meters on either side of the second cone. All times were recorded using an electronic timing gate (Fusion Sport Inc.), set at a height of 0.75 meters and spanning 3 meters wide, aligned with the marked starting point. Participants were instructed to sprint forward 9.14 meters from the starting line to the first cone, touching it with their right hand. They then shuffled 4.57 meters to the left to reach the second cone, touching it with their left hand. Subsequently, they shuffled 9.14 meters to the right to the third cone, touching it with their right hand, and shuffled 4.57 meters back to the middle cone, touching it with their left hand. Finally, they backpedaled to the starting line. Timing commenced as participants passed through the timing gates and concluded upon their return
Measured: 8 weeks
Proprioception Test
For the position perception test, the IsoMed-2000 isokinetic testing apparatus was utilized (IsoMed-2000 dynamometer; D \& R Ferstl GmbH, Hemau, Germany) as described by Wang et al. (2023). Participants wore headphones and an eye mask to eliminate external auditory and visual influences. They maintained their knee joint in the testing position, allowing the isokinetic device (operating at an angular velocity of 1°/s) to automatically flex and extend to the predetermined angles of 30° and 60°.When the angle returned to 0°, the participant moved to the specified position after the automatic stop of the button movement. The difference between the actual angle and the pre-set angle was recorded. Each angle test was conducted three times to calculate the average value.
Measured: 8 weeks
Y Balance Test
Before screening, participants removed their socks and shoes, watched a brief instructional video on performing the Y Balance Test (YBT), and were allowed 4 to 6 practice trials for each limb in each of the three reach directions. Following the practice trials, we measured the lower extremity length from the inferior border of the anterior superior iliac spine to the inferior border of the medial malleolus. Participants then performed dynamic balance tests on both the right and left lower extremities, reaching in the anterior (ANT), posteromedial (PM), and posterolateral (PL) directions with the contralateral limb. Three successful reaches were recorded, and the maximal reach distance in each direction was used for data analysis. To obtain relative values for each direction for both the right and left limbs, the following formula was applied: Relative (normalized) reach distance (%) = (Absolute reach distance / Limb length) × 100.
Measured: 8 weeks
Secondary outcomes (3)
Body weight
Body weight was measured with participants wearing light underwear, standing, and with a precision of 0.1 kg.
Measured: 8 weeks
Body height
Body height was measured with participants standing upright, feet together, back against the wall, and recorded to the nearest 0.1 cm as the maximum distance from the floor to the highest point on the head.
Measured: 8 weeks
Leg length
Leg length was measured using a tape measure from the anterior superior iliac spine (ASIS) to the medial malleolus. Leg length measurements were taken three times for each limb with the participants in a lying position (Sabharwal and Kumar, 2008).
Measured: 8 weeks
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted17 Jan 2025
- Study start27 Feb 2024
- Primary completion12 May 2024
- Study completion15 Sep 2024
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (1)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for HealthyStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Health services research
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 22 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Hellenic Naval Academy
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Democritus University of Thrace
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Gerasimos Grivas, University of Thessaly
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06781268
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 2024-434
- Acronym
- LiKT-Fence RCT
- Status last verified
- Jan 2025
- First submitted
- 4 Jan 2025
- Last updated
- 17 Jan 2025
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No: IPD will not be shared to ensure the privacy and confidentiality of participants. Additionally, explicit consent for data sharing was not obtained from participants or their guardians during the study, and the ethical approval did not include provisions for sharing individual data externally.
Publications
Yarayan YE, Keskin K, Celik OB, Guder BC, Kurtipek S, Aslan M, Sogut T, Durhan TA, Alkhamees NH, Sheeha BB, Alghannam AF, Al-Mhanna SB, Grivas GV, Batrakoulis A. Impact of life kinetik training on balance, agility, jumping, proprioception, and cognitive function in preadolescent recreational fencing athletes: a randomized controlled trial. BMC Sports Sci Med Rehabil. 2025 Jun 7;17(1):146. doi: 10.1186/s13102-025-01186-3.
PubMed 40483500
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 17 Jan 2025. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Impact of Life Kinetic Training on Balance, Agility, Jumping, Proprioception, and Cognitive Function in Preadolescent Recreational Fencing Athletes: a Randomized Controlled Trial
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06781268
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- LiKT-Fence RCT / 2024-434
- Conditions
- Healthy
- Keywords
- Children, Life kinetic, Motor skills, Exercise, Physical fitness
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 22 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Hellenic Naval AcademyUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Democritus University of Thrace
- Study start
- 27 Feb 2024 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 12 May 2024 (actual)
- Study completion
- 15 Sep 2024 (actual)
- First posted
- 17 Jan 2025 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The purpose of this study was to examine whether Life Kinetic (LK) exercises could improve balance, agility, jumping performance, proprioception, and cognitive functions in recreationally active preadolescents participating in fencing. It specifically aimed to answer if LK training would lead to significant enhancements in these physical and cognitive attributes compared to a control group.
Detailed description
This study evaluated the effects of Life Kinetic (LK) training on balance, agility, jumping performance, proprioception, and cognitive functions in preadolescent recreational fencers. A total of 22 participants, aged 11.6 ± 1.2 years, were randomly assigned to either the experimental group, which performed LK exercises twice weekly for eight weeks, or the control group, which continued their regular fencing activities. The LK exercises combined physical and cognitive tasks to stimulate neuroplasticity and improve overall athletic and mental performance. Key metrics included agility, vertical jump, star balance, Stroop test, and proprioception assessments.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Health services research
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Life Kinetic Training Group | Experimental | Behavioral: Life Kinetic TrainingParticipants in this group engaged in Life Kinetic (LK) exercises twice a week for eight weeks. The training program combined physical and cognitive tasks designed to enhance neuroplasticity, improve balance, agility, jumping performance, proprioception, and cognitive functions. The exercises included activities that stimulated mental and physical coordination, aimed at improving overall athletic and mental performance. |
| Control group | No intervention | –Participants in the control group continued their usual recreational fencing training without additional intervention. To match the exposure of the experimental group, they engaged in structured, low-intensity activities unrelated to the objectives of Life Kinetic Training. These activities included light stretching, basic coordination drills, and non-cognitive motor tasks, conducted at the same frequency and duration as the experimental sessions (twice per week for one hour). These activities were designed to simulate a training environment while lacking the cognitive and motor integration components central to the intervention. At the end of the study, participants were fully debriefed about the nature and purpose of their activities, including the rationale for the placebo-like design, as part of the ethical protocol. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 10 to 12 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Child
Key inclusion criteria (2 listed)
- Preadolescents aged between 10 and 12 years. Recreationally active in fencing and registered with the same athletic club. Healthy participants with no chronic illnesses, musculoskeletal injuries, or physical limitations in the last six months.
- No use of medication within six months prior to the study. Written informed consent provided by the participants and their parents or guardians.
Key exclusion criteria (4 listed)
- History of chronic illnesses or conditions that could interfere with physical activity (e.g., asthma, cardiovascular issues).
- Any injury or physical limitation in the last six months that could impact performance.
- Use of medication that could affect physical or cognitive performance within six months before the study.
- Participants outside the specified age range (10-12 years). Lack of parental or participant consent.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Life Kinetic TrainingCombination of cognitive and physical exercises aimed at improving neuroplasticity, agility, balance, and cognitive functions. | Behavioural | Life Kinetic Training Group |
Primary outcome
Counter Movement Jump Measurement
Time frame: 8 weeks
The counter movement jump (CMJ) was assessed utilizing the OptoJump Next system (Microgate, Bolzano, Italy). After a self-administered warm-up session, participants performed 3 trials of the counter-movement jump without arm swings, followed by a one-minute rest period, after which they completed the actual CMJ test. Each participant completed three repetitions of the CMJ without arm swings, and the highest result in centimeters (jumping height) was documented as the primary outcome measure. The OptoJump, a dual-beam optical apparatus, quantifies contact and flight durations during jump sequences (or individual jumps). Flight time (tair) was employed to determine the elevation of the body's center of gravity.
Stroop Color and Word Test
Time frame: 8 weeks
A Stroop test comprising three distinct conditions was employed (Scarpina and Tagini, 2017). Each condition featured 60 stimuli, arranged with 6 items per line on a 21.5 × 29 cm sheet of paper. In the initial condition, referred to as the reading condition, participants were required to read words printed in black ink, which included the names of colors such as red, green, blue, and yellow. In the second condition, known as the naming condition, participants were instructed to identify the colors of various rectangles. In the third condition, termed the interference condition, participants were required to name the color of the ink used to print the words, while disregarding the semantic content of the words themselves, as they were incongruent with the ink color (e.g., the word "green" printed in red ink). This condition specifically tested the participants' inhibitory control. Across all conditions, participants were instructed to respond as quickly as possible while minimizing erro
Agility T-test
Time frame: 8 weeks
The T-test was conducted as previously described (Semenick, 1990). Four cones were positioned in a T formation, with one cone located 9.14 meters from the starting cone and two additional cones placed 4.57 meters on either side of the second cone. All times were recorded using an electronic timing gate (Fusion Sport Inc.), set at a height of 0.75 meters and spanning 3 meters wide, aligned with the marked starting point. Participants were instructed to sprint forward 9.14 meters from the starting line to the first cone, touching it with their right hand. They then shuffled 4.57 meters to the left to reach the second cone, touching it with their left hand. Subsequently, they shuffled 9.14 meters to the right to the third cone, touching it with their right hand, and shuffled 4.57 meters back to the middle cone, touching it with their left hand. Finally, they backpedaled to the starting line. Timing commenced as participants passed through the timing gates and concluded upon their return
Proprioception Test
Time frame: 8 weeks
For the position perception test, the IsoMed-2000 isokinetic testing apparatus was utilized (IsoMed-2000 dynamometer; D \& R Ferstl GmbH, Hemau, Germany) as described by Wang et al. (2023). Participants wore headphones and an eye mask to eliminate external auditory and visual influences. They maintained their knee joint in the testing position, allowing the isokinetic device (operating at an angular velocity of 1°/s) to automatically flex and extend to the predetermined angles of 30° and 60°.When the angle returned to 0°, the participant moved to the specified position after the automatic stop of the button movement. The difference between the actual angle and the pre-set angle was recorded. Each angle test was conducted three times to calculate the average value.
Y Balance Test
Time frame: 8 weeks
Before screening, participants removed their socks and shoes, watched a brief instructional video on performing the Y Balance Test (YBT), and were allowed 4 to 6 practice trials for each limb in each of the three reach directions. Following the practice trials, we measured the lower extremity length from the inferior border of the anterior superior iliac spine to the inferior border of the medial malleolus. Participants then performed dynamic balance tests on both the right and left lower extremities, reaching in the anterior (ANT), posteromedial (PM), and posterolateral (PL) directions with the contralateral limb. Three successful reaches were recorded, and the maximal reach distance in each direction was used for data analysis. To obtain relative values for each direction for both the right and left limbs, the following formula was applied: Relative (normalized) reach distance (%) = (Absolute reach distance / Limb length) × 100.
3 secondary outcomes
Body weight
Time frame: 8 weeks
Body height
Time frame: 8 weeks
Leg length
Time frame: 8 weeks
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 17 Jan 2025.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 40483500Yarayan YE, Keskin K, Celik OB, Guder BC, Kurtipek S, Aslan M, Sogut T, Durhan TA, Alkhamees NH, Sheeha BB, Alghannam AF, Al-Mhanna SB, Grivas GV, Batrakoulis A. Impact of life kinetik training on balance, agility, jumping, proprioception, and cognitive function in preadolescent recreational fencing athletes: a randomized controlled trial. BMC Sports Sci Med Rehabil. 2025 Jun 7;17(1):146. doi: 10.1186/s13102-025-01186-3.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No. IPD will not be shared to ensure the privacy and confidentiality of participants. Additionally, explicit consent for data sharing was not obtained from participants or their guardians during the study, and the ethical approval did not include provisions for sharing individual data externally.
Related trials for Healthy
Recruiting
THE EFFECTS OF GAME-BASED EXERCISE PROGRAMS
Physical Activity, Body Image
Not yet recruitingPhase 1
A Phase I Study of GLR2053 Tablets in Chinese Healthy Adult Participants
Atopic Dermatitis
Recruiting
Colon-delivered Riboflavin and Gut Microbiota Composition
Microbiome Dysbiosis, Gut Health
Not yet recruiting
Neuroergonomic Analysis of a Brain-Computer Interface Device (BCI)
Healthy Volunteers - Male and Female
RecruitingPhase 1
First-in-Human Trial to Assess REGN20423 in Healthy Adult Participants and Adult Participants With Atopic Dermatitis
Healthy Volunteer, Atopic Dermatitis
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Life Kinetic Training in people with Healthy, run by Hellenic Naval Academy at 1 site in Greece.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 2 inclusion and 4 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 17 Jan 2025. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Greece. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Counter Movement Jump Measurement (time frame: 8 weeks). The study lists 5 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT06781268, which also lists 1 linked publication.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 17 Jan 2025.