![]() Include an objective measure of athlete well-being and Include a subjective self-report measure of athlete well-being with published validity and reliability Not include a non-training experimental intervention Study population of athlete(s) who were currently in training The first author (AS) screened all articles. If it was unclear from the title or abstract whether a study met the inclusion criteria, the full-text was sought and screened against the selection criteria. Results were initially screened by title and abstract against the selection criteria. Therefore, we systematically reviewed whether subjective measures accurately reflected changes in athlete well-being (as objectively measured by performance, physiological and biochemical indicators) and whether subjective measures were responsive to acute changes in training load, and chronic training. ![]() However, it is unknown whether subjective measures accurately reflect changes in athlete well-being, and how they can be effectively integrated into applied practice. ![]() Subjective measures for routine athlete monitoring are also relatively cheap and simple to implement compared to objective measures. 5, 20 These signs and symptoms may be self-reported by athletes as perceived physical and psychological well-being, collectively termed ‘subjective measures’. While there remains debate on the specific physiological mechanisms underlying the progression towards overtraining syndrome, there is agreement that progression is associated with psychological signs such as mood disturbances and symptoms similar to clinical depression. 12, 14, 17–19 Whether markers are elevated or depressed may also depend on the position along the athlete well-being continuum, with proposed physiological mechanisms involving an initial heightened response that later becomes exhausted. This has been attributed to factors such as intra-assay and interassay variability, intraindividual and interindividual variability, the influence of circadian and pulsatile rhythms, nutrition and hydration status, climate, psychosocial factors and particular exercise characteristics. 12–16 Hormonal, immune, inflammatory and haematological parameters along with cardiovascular responses have been proposed as markers of these mechanisms, however findings have been inconsistent. ![]() 11Ī considerable body of research has investigated potential physiological mechanisms underlying the progression towards overtraining syndrome. 2 Performance is the ultimate indicator of physical and psychological well-being and the athlete's readiness to compete, yet it is impractical to test athletes daily via performance tests. There is currently a relatively poor understanding of which measures are most appropriate. Performance, physiological, biochemical and subjective measures are all options for athlete monitoring. Athletes should be closely monitored to ensure training elicits the desired effects on athlete well-being and performance. ![]() 1, 2 While overreaching may be carefully incorporated into a periodised training plan, progression towards overtraining syndrome is undesirable. Training imposes stress on an athlete, shifting their physical and psychological well-being along a continuum that progresses from acute fatigue to overreaching, and ultimately overtraining syndrome. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |