11 sources: 3 meta-analyses, 1 non-randomised trial, 5 randomised controlled trials, 2 with design not recorded
Physical · Concept
Agility and Change-of-Direction Ability
The trainable skill of rapidly accelerating, decelerating, and changing direction.
2 of 12 sources behind this entry were read from the abstract only; they are marked in the sources list.
IntermediateGym, field, or open space
Before you start
Requires warm-up and sound landing/braking technique.
When to seek a professional
- Joint pain, swelling, or instability during cutting movements
- Recent lower-limb injury not cleared for high-impact work
2–3×/week of agility drills with adequate rest between efforts, ≥6 weeks
The research behind this entry does not establish an amount, so this is a practical starting point rather than a research-backed number.
Cones, ladder, open spaceAthletesFor most adultsOlder adults
What the evidence says
What the sources say
Agility combines rapid whole-body movement with braking and redirection, drawing on strength, coordination, and reactive decision-making. Training that includes agility-like drills improves mobility and function and is used both for athletic performance and, in adapted forms, for older adults.
Common misconceptions
- 'Agility is just speed' (braking and redirection are distinct trainable skills)
- 'Only athletes need agility' (agility-like training targets qualities that decline with age and has been studied in older adults as well as athletes)
What we won't claim
- Does not guarantee prevention of any fall or injury
- Not a substitute for medical evaluation of dizziness, syncope, or unexplained falls
- Does not guarantee improved sport performance or injury avoidance
11 sources: 3 meta-analyses, 1 non-randomised trial, 5 randomised controlled trials, 2 with design not recorded
- Agreement
- Direction recorded for 1 of 11 sources; not yet recorded for the rest.
- The claim's outcome
- Outcome not yet recorded
- Certainty
- No source states a certainty rating.
- Authors
- Sources share authors: Eric Lichtenstein (first author of 2 sources); L. Donath (senior author of 2 sources).
- How the sources were read
- Some sources are based on abstracts, not full texts.
What each source measured and concluded (11)
randomised controlled trial · 2017
Wiesmeier et al. (2017) — Balance Training Enhances Vestibular Function and Reduces Overactive Proprioceptive Feedback in Elderly
- What it measured
- Postural control (spontaneous sway and postural reactions), TUG, FRT
- How it measured it
- Laboratory tests (force transducing platform, tilting platform), validated clinical tests (TUG, FRT)
- Direction it states for the claim's outcome
- Improved
- How it was read
- read in full text
non-randomised trial · 2024
Zia (2024) — ENHANCING BALANCE AND NEUROMUSCULAR COORDINATION THROUGH AGILITY TRAINING IN YOUNG ADULTS
- What it measured
- Balance (Stork Stand Balance Test) and neuromuscular coordination (McDonald Soccer Test)
- How it was read
- based on the abstract, not the full text
meta-analysis · 2022
Phu et al. (2022) — Impact of ageing, fall history and exercise on postural reflexes following unpredictable perturbations: A systematic review and meta-analyses.
- What it measured
- Muscle onset latency (postural reflexes) following unpredictable perturbations
- How it was read
- based on the abstract, not the full text
- What the review says it includes
- Systematic review and meta-analyses
- Studies and participants, as stated
- N=1257 across 37 articles
randomised controlled trial · 2023
Lichtenstein et al. (2023) — Agility training to integratively promote neuromuscular, cardiorespiratory and cognitive function in healthy older adults: a one-year randomized-controlled trial
- What it measured
- Neuromuscular, cognitive, and cardiovascular performance measures.
- How it measured it
- Objective tests for strength, power, balance, gait speed, aerobic capacity, and cognitive performance.
- How it was read
- read in full text
meta-analysis · 2021
Morat et al. (2021) — Effects of multimodal agility-like exercise training compared to inactive controls and alternative training on physical performance in older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis
- What it measured
- Physical performance (strength, gait, balance, mobility, endurance).
- How it measured it
- Standardized mean differences (SMD).
- How it was read
- read in full text
- What the review says it includes
- Meta-analysis of 20 trials
- Studies and participants, as stated
- N=1632 participants across 20 studies
- Heterogeneity, as stated
- High study heterogeneity.
- Heterogeneity, as stated
- Heterogeneous control conditions.
randomised controlled trial · 2019
Lichtenstein et al. (2019) — Agility-based exercise training compared to traditional strength and balance training in older adults: a pilot randomized trial
- What it measured
- Static and dynamic balance, lower limb and trunk strength and rate of torque development, endurance.
- How it measured it
- Single leg eyes open stand, Y-balance test, reactive balance, plantar flexion and dorsal extension strength, trunk flexion and extension strength, rate of torque development, six-minute walk test.
- How it was read
- read in full text
randomised controlled trial · 2019
Zouhal et al. (2019) — Effects of Neuromuscular Training on Agility Performance in Elite Soccer Players
- What it measured
- Agility performance measured by movement time (MT).
- How it measured it
- Reactive agility test involving 180-degree body rotations followed by a 5-m linear sprint (objective).
- How it was read
- read in full text
randomised controlled trial · 2007
Westlake et al. (2007) — Sensory-Specific Balance Training in Older Adults: Effect on Proprioceptive Reintegration and Cognitive Demands
- What it measured
- Center-of-pressure (COP) velocity change score after proprioceptive perturbation
- How it was read
- screened only, not extracted
design not recorded · 2010
Keogh et al. (2010) — Strength and coordination training are both effective in reducing the postural tremor amplitude of older adults.
- What it measured
- Postural tremor amplitude and upper limb muscle coactivation after 6-week training
- How it was read
- screened only, not extracted
design not recorded · 2001
Carroll et al. (2001) — Resistance training enhances the stability of sensorimotor coordination
- What it measured
- Stability of movement coordination (synchronize/syncopate finger movements) and muscle recruitment
- How it was read
- screened only, not extracted
meta-analysis · 2025
Saini et al. (2025) — Ascertaining the Effectiveness of Coordination Training Interventions in Enhancing Sports Performance: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
- What it measured
- Sports performance and motor coordination
- How it was read
- screened only, not extracted
- What the review says it includes
- Systematic review and meta-analysis
- Studies and participants, as stated
- 11 studies
Key sources (12) · 1 not counted
Each source below is shown with its study design and a link to the original study, or, where it is not a completed research paper, with what kind of record it is; those are not counted. This is the audit trail.
randomised controlled trialBalance Training Enhances Vestibular Function and Reduces Overactive Proprioceptive Feedback in Elderly
non-randomised trialENHANCING BALANCE AND NEUROMUSCULAR COORDINATION THROUGH AGILITY TRAINING IN YOUNG ADULTS
meta-analysisImpact of ageing, fall history and exercise on postural reflexes following unpredictable perturbations: A systematic review and meta-analyses.
randomised controlled trialAgility training to integratively promote neuromuscular, cardiorespiratory and cognitive function in healthy older adults: a one-year randomized-controlled trial
meta-analysisEffects of multimodal agility-like exercise training compared to inactive controls and alternative training on physical performance in older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis
randomised controlled trialAgility-based exercise training compared to traditional strength and balance training in older adults: a pilot randomized trial
Type not recordedEfectividad en programas preventivos de lesiones deportivas músculo esqueléticas en adultos sedentarios que inician actividad física. / Effectiveness in preventive programs of skeletal muscle injuries in sedentary adults who initiate a sports activity.
randomised controlled trialEffects of Neuromuscular Training on Agility Performance in Elite Soccer Players
randomised controlled trialSensory-Specific Balance Training in Older Adults: Effect on Proprioceptive Reintegration and Cognitive Demands
design not recordedStrength and coordination training are both effective in reducing the postural tremor amplitude of older adults.
design not recordedResistance training enhances the stability of sensorimotor coordination
meta-analysisAscertaining the Effectiveness of Coordination Training Interventions in Enhancing Sports Performance: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Why do some records show a record type instead of a study design?
A study design is shown for a completed, peer-reviewed paper. A registered protocol, a preprint, a conference abstract, a referee report or a book chapter has not been through peer review as a finished paper, so it is labelled for what it is, and it is counted in no source count. Where a record could not be confirmed as a completed paper at all, it says so rather than guessing. They all stay in the list, and their DOI still resolves, because the count of what was screened is part of the audit trail.
- Protocol / registration A registered plan for a review or trial, not its results.
- Preprint Posted by its authors before peer review.
- Conference abstract A conference summary rather than a peer-reviewed paper.
- Peer-review report A referee's report on a paper, not the paper itself.
- Guideline / position stand A recommendation derived from evidence, which is a step further from the data than the evidence itself.
- Book chapter A chapter in a scholarly book rather than a journal paper.
- Type not recorded Our record does not say what kind of publication this is, so it is counted in no source count. That is a gap in our data, not a judgement about the research.
“Abstract only” means the review read that paper’s abstract, not its full text; “screened only” means it was included at re-screening and not extracted. Both stay in the trail with their DOI, because how a source was read is part of the audit.
Explore all 718 studies in Neuromotor (Balance/Agility/Coordination) →
The full evidence base this focus area draws on, every study with its design and DOI.What it is for
Move more freelyMove with better coordination and quicknessPerform better in my sport