3
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Development of a Revised Conceptual Framework of Physical Training for Use in Research and Practice

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Related collections

          Most cited references94

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Monitoring Training Load to Understand Fatigue in Athletes

          Many athletes, coaches, and support staff are taking an increasingly scientific approach to both designing and monitoring training programs. Appropriate load monitoring can aid in determining whether an athlete is adapting to a training program and in minimizing the risk of developing non-functional overreaching, illness, and/or injury. In order to gain an understanding of the training load and its effect on the athlete, a number of potential markers are available for use. However, very few of these markers have strong scientific evidence supporting their use, and there is yet to be a single, definitive marker described in the literature. Research has investigated a number of external load quantifying and monitoring tools, such as power output measuring devices, time-motion analysis, as well as internal load unit measures, including perception of effort, heart rate, blood lactate, and training impulse. Dissociation between external and internal load units may reveal the state of fatigue of an athlete. Other monitoring tools used by high-performance programs include heart rate recovery, neuromuscular function, biochemical/hormonal/immunological assessments, questionnaires and diaries, psychomotor speed, and sleep quality and quantity. The monitoring approach taken with athletes may depend on whether the athlete is engaging in individual or team sport activity; however, the importance of individualization of load monitoring cannot be over emphasized. Detecting meaningful changes with scientific and statistical approaches can provide confidence and certainty when implementing change. Appropriate monitoring of training load can provide important information to athletes and coaches; however, monitoring systems should be intuitive, provide efficient data analysis and interpretation, and enable efficient reporting of simple, yet scientifically valid, feedback.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            A Structural Approach to Selection Bias

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of the overtraining syndrome: joint consensus statement of the European College of Sport Science and the American College of Sports Medicine.

              Successful training not only must involve overload but also must avoid the combination of excessive overload plus inadequate recovery. Athletes can experience short-term performance decrement without severe psychological or lasting other negative symptoms. This functional overreaching will eventually lead to an improvement in performance after recovery. When athletes do not sufficiently respect the balance between training and recovery, nonfunctional overreaching (NFOR) can occur. The distinction between NFOR and overtraining syndrome (OTS) is very difficult and will depend on the clinical outcome and exclusion diagnosis. The athlete will often show the same clinical, hormonal, and other signs and symptoms. A keyword in the recognition of OTS might be "prolonged maladaptation" not only of the athlete but also of several biological, neurochemical, and hormonal regulation mechanisms. It is generally thought that symptoms of OTS, such as fatigue, performance decline, and mood disturbances, are more severe than those of NFOR. However, there is no scientific evidence to either confirm or refute this suggestion. One approach to understanding the etiology of OTS involves the exclusion of organic diseases or infections and factors such as dietary caloric restriction (negative energy balance) and insufficient carbohydrate and/or protein intake, iron deficiency, magnesium deficiency, allergies, and others together with identification of initiating events or triggers. In this article, we provide the recent status of possible markers for the detection of OTS. Currently, several markers (hormones, performance tests, psychological tests, and biochemical and immune markers) are used, but none of them meet all the criteria to make their use generally accepted.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                (View ORCID Profile)
                Journal
                Sports Medicine
                Sports Med
                Springer Science and Business Media LLC
                0112-1642
                1179-2035
                September 14 2021
                Article
                10.1007/s40279-021-01551-5
                34519982
                29656431-5beb-41c7-b76c-5cbd4e55e892
                © 2021

                https://www.springer.com/tdm

                https://www.springer.com/tdm

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article