Abstract
Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to reduced physical activity and increased sedentary behaviors, negatively impacting mental and physical health. Engaging in physical activity at home during quarantine became essential to counteracting these adverse effects. To develop appropriate physical activity programs, assessing individuals' fitness levels and the impact of inactivity is crucial. This study aims to compare motor abilities-including flexibility, balance, reaction time, cardiovascular endurance, and lower and upper limb strength-assessed both in-person and remotely, to determine the accuracy and repeatability of self-administered tests. Methods: A total of 35 young subjects (age 24.2 ± 1.97 years, BMI 22.4 ± 2.61 kg/m(2)) participated in this study. Each participant underwent a battery of motor ability tests designed to assess various fitness components. The tests were administered twice for each subject: once in a laboratory setting and once remotely at home. The sequence of tests was randomly assigned to ensure unbiased results. Both the in-person and remote assessments were used to evaluate the accuracy and reliability of self-administered tests. Results: The comparison of test results between the laboratory and remote settings revealed percentage differences ranging from 5% to 10%. This variation is considered an acceptable margin of error, suggesting that the tests conducted remotely were relatively accurate when compared to those performed in a controlled laboratory environment. Conclusions: The findings indicate that remote fitness testing is a promising method for evaluating motor abilities. With an acceptable margin of error, remote assessments can be effectively used to personalize training programs based on individuals' physiological characteristics. This approach may be particularly beneficial during times of limited access to fitness facilities, such as during quarantine, or for individuals seeking more flexible fitness evaluation methods.