Symptoms of Overtraining in Resistance Exercise: International Cross-Sectional Survey

Effect of Exercise Therapy on Cancer-Related Fatigue in Patients With Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to explore the efficacy of different exercise therapies in reducing fatigue in patients with breast cancer.

DESIGN

PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, China Biology Medicine, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Database of Chinese Sci-tech Periodicals, and Wanfang databases were searched from their inception to March 2022. The authors independently screened all randomized controlled trials of exercise therapy in patients with breast cancer. A network meta-analysis was performed using Stata 16.0 software.

RESULTS

Seventy-eight studies were analyzed, with 167 comparisons and 6235 patients. The network results showed that stretching (standardized mean difference = -0.74, confidence interval = -1.43 to -0.06), yoga (standardized mean difference = -0.49, confidence interval = -0.75 to -0.22), combined exercise (standardized mean difference = -0.47, confidence interval = -0.70 to -0.24), aerobic exercise (standardized mean difference = -0.46, confidence interval = -0.66 to -0.26), and resistance exercise (standardized mean difference = -0.42, confidence interval = -0.77 to -0.08) significantly reduced fatigue. Pairwise comparisons confirmed that yoga, combined exercise, aerobic exercise, and resistance exercise were positively associated with fatigue relief. However, no significant association was identified between reduced fatigue and traditional Chinese exercises or stretching.

CONCLUSIONS

The most effective exercise therapy to relieve cancer-related fatigue in patients with breast cancer was yoga, followed by combined aerobic and resistance exercises. It is expected that more randomized controlled trials will be conducted to further explore the efficacy and mechanisms of exercise.

Coaches' Perceptions of Factors Driving Training Adaptation: An International Survey

OBJECTIVE

We surveyed coaches' views on topics related to the training process to elucidate whether their opinions are aligned with the current literature. Here the results for a sub-set of questions regarding factors affecting the training adaptation process are presented and discussed.

METHODS

106 coaches [age range 18-65 + years, 31% 15 + years coaching, 58% individual-events/sports and 32% international level] from a number of countries completed a novel cross-sectional online survey about the planning of training and the training process.

RESULTS

Only 28% of participants indicated that physical training was the most important factor in determining sport performance; whereas 99% indicated non-physical factors influence physical training response. The top five factors in modifying an athlete's ability to physically adapt to a training plan, as rated 'absolutely essential', were 'coach-athlete relationship' (56%), 'life stress' (41%), 'athletes' belief in the plan' (37%), 'psychological and emotional stress' (35%) and 'physical training' (33%).

CONCLUSIONS

Amongst coaches surveyed less than a third rated physical training as the most important factor in determining sports performance. Non-physical factors were acknowledged by the majority to exert an influence on physical training response and adaptation, despite the lack of discussion in training research, though there was no consensus on the relative importance of each individual factor. We echo previous sentiments that coaches need to be engaged in the research process. If training research continues as present the field runs the risk of not only becoming detached but increasingly irrelevant to those it is trying to help.

Coaches' Perceptions of Common Planning Concepts Within Training Theory: An International Survey

BACKGROUND

The planning of training is a popular yet controversial topic among coaches and sports scientists. Periodisation is often presented in the literature as the most efficacious approach to planning training. While historically surveys of coaches appeared to support this a key failing was that no unified definition of periodisation exists. Recent surveys offering a periodisation definition and an alternative planning methodology found many choosing the alternative therefore questioning periodisation's wide acceptance. The current survey looked to explore how coaches perceived specific concepts, drawn from the literature, that relate to the planning of training.

METHODS

106 coaches [age range: 18-65+ years, 31% 15+ years coaching, 58% individual-events/sports and 32% international level] from across the world completed a novel cross-sectional online survey on the planning of training and the training process. Topics included use of periodisation, division of time into discrete periods, assignment of goals and training to pre-determined periods and the adaptability of pre-established plans.

RESULTS

The majority described their planning approach as training periodisation (71%). Similarly, there was strong agreement with the necessity to determining a goal for the season (85%) and divide the season into distinct manageable periods of time (73%). When examining whether physical adaptations are achievable within specific and fixed timeframes only a minority (33%) agreed, a similar result was found for training physical capacities in a sequential order (37%). Finally, there was limited support for training targets remaining fixed over a training period (10%).

CONCLUSIONS

As a tool for the planning of athlete's training, periodisation is often presented as the best and most popular approach. Recent research however has highlighted possible discrepancies in its usage among practitioners. The results of this survey echo this and question the acceptance of periodisation concepts even among periodisation users. In part this may be due to key tenets of periodisation no longer being supported by research or practice. A lingering question then is whether the beliefs of coaches, developed through experience and supported by research, will continue to be marginalized. If sports scientists wish to aid coaches then they need to be engaged in future research initiatives as co-collaborators.

Exploring subjective responses in high-intensity multimodal training: an online cross-sectional survey

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to investigate exercise enjoyment in high-intensity multimodal training (HIMT) in current and previous HIMT participants and identify factors associated with HIMT that mediate exercise enjoyment and motivation.

DESIGN AND SETTING

A 124-item web-based survey was distributed to a cross-sectional voluntary convenience sample from August to the end of September 2021.

PARTICIPANTS

Global current and previous HIMT participants.

RESULTS

The final sample included 469 responses (completion rate: 61.6%). Among eligible respondents (n=434), 379 were current HIMT participants, 55 were previous HIMT participants. Current participants demonstrated high enjoyment (Physical Activity Enjoyment Scale). The most frequently reported reasons for increased enjoyment and motivation to continue HIMT in current participants included (1) it keeps me fit, (2) training in a group and (3) variety in a session. The most frequently reported reasons for reduced motivation to continue HIMT among previous HIMT participants included (1) other (injury, COVID-19 restrictions, low motivation, personal preferences), (2) work commitments and (3) I started another type of sport, exercise or training.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings indicate that HIMT is an enjoyable training method among current participants. The most commonly reported reasons for increased enjoyment and motivation were associated with the combined training method and the group environment. Reasons for reduced motivation to continue HIMT among previous HIMT participants may be related to commonly reported barriers to exercise and personal factors.

"You can't shoot another bullet until you've reloaded the gun": Coaches' perceptions, practices and experiences of deloading in strength and physique sports

Deloading refers to a purposeful reduction in training demand with the intention of enhancing preparedness for successive training cycles. Whilst deloading is a common training practice in strength and physique sports, little is known about how the necessary reduction in training demand should be accomplished. Therefore, the purpose of this research was to determine current deloading practices in competitive strength and physique sports. Eighteen strength and physique coaches from a range of sports (weightlifting, powerlifting, and bodybuilding) participated in semi-structured interviews to discuss their experiences of deloading. The mean duration of coaching experience at ≥ national standard was 10.9 (SD = 3.9) years. Qualitative content analysis identified Three categories: definitions, rationale, and application. Participants conceptualised deloading as a periodic, intentional cycle of reduced training demand designed to facilitate fatigue management, improve recovery, and assist in overall training progression and readiness. There was no single method of deloading; instead, a reduction in training volume (achieved through a reduction in repetitions per set and number of sets per training session) and intensity of effort (increased proximity to failure and/or reduction in relative load) were the most adapted training variables, along with alterations in exercise selection and configuration. Deloading was typically prescribed for a duration of 5 to 7 days and programmed every 4 to 6 weeks, although periodicity was highly variable. Additional findings highlight the underrepresentation of deloading in the published literature, including a lack of a clear operational definition.

“I Want to Create So Much Stimulus That Adaptation Goes Through the Roof”: High-Performance Strength Coaches' Perceptions of Planned Overreaching

Functional overreaching (FOR) occurs when athletes experience improved athletic capabilities in the days and weeks following short-term periods of increased training demand. However, prolonged high training demand with insufficient recovery may also lead to non-functional overreaching (NFOR) or the overtraining syndrome (OTS). The aim of this research was to explore strength coaches' perceptions and experiences of planned overreaching (POR); short-term periods of increased training demand designed to improve athletic performance. Fourteen high-performance strength coaches (weightlifting; n = 5, powerlifting; n = 4, sprinting; n = 2, throws; n = 2, jumps; n = 1) participated in semistructured interviews. Reflexive thematic analysis identified 3 themes: creating enough challenge, training prescription, and questioning the risk to reward. POR was implemented for a 7 to 14 day training cycle and facilitated through increased daily/weekly training volume and/or training intensity. Participants implemented POR in the weeks (~5–8 weeks) preceding competition to allow sufficient time for performance restoration and improvement to occur. Short-term decreased performance capacity, both during and in the days to weeks following training, was an anticipated by-product of POR, and at times used as a benchmark to confirm that training demand was sufficiently challenging. Some participants chose not to implement POR due to a lack of knowledge, confidence, and/or perceived increased risk of athlete training maladaptation. Additionally, this research highlights the potential dichotomy between POR protocols used by strength coaches to enhance athletic performance and those used for the purpose of inducing training maladaptation for diagnostic identification.

"Is It Overtraining or Just Work Ethic?": Coaches' Perceptions of Overtraining in High-Performance Strength Sports

Optimal physical performance is achieved through the careful manipulation of training and recovery. Short-term increases in training demand can induce functional overreaching (FOR) that can lead to improved physical capabilities, whereas nonfunctional overreaching (NFOR) or the overtraining syndrome (OTS) occur when high training-demand is applied for extensive periods with limited recovery. To date, little is known about the OTS in strength sports, particularly from the perspective of the strength sport coach. Fourteen high-performance strength sport coaches from a range of strength sports (weightlifting; n = 5, powerlifting; n = 4, sprinting; n = 2, throws; n = 2, jumps; n = 1) participated in semistructured interviews (mean duration 57; SD = 10 min) to discuss their experiences of the OTS. Reflexive thematic analysis resulted in the identification of four higher order themes: definitions, symptoms, recovery and experiences and observations. Additional subthemes were created to facilitate organisation and presentation of data, and to aid both cohesiveness of reporting and publicising of results. Participants provided varied and sometimes dichotomous perceptions of the OTS and proposed a multifactorial profile of diagnostic symptoms. Prevalence of OTS within strength sports was considered low, with the majority of participants not observing or experiencing long-term reductions in performance with their athletes.