Cargando…
Monitoring training status with HR measures: do all roads lead to Rome?
Measures of resting, exercise, and recovery heart rate are receiving increasing interest for monitoring fatigue, fitness and endurance performance responses, which has direct implications for adjusting training load (1) daily during specific training blocks and (2) throughout the competitive season....
Autor principal: | |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2014
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3936188/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24578692 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2014.00073 |
_version_ | 1782305287002128384 |
---|---|
author | Buchheit, Martin |
author_facet | Buchheit, Martin |
author_sort | Buchheit, Martin |
collection | PubMed |
description | Measures of resting, exercise, and recovery heart rate are receiving increasing interest for monitoring fatigue, fitness and endurance performance responses, which has direct implications for adjusting training load (1) daily during specific training blocks and (2) throughout the competitive season. However, these measures are still not widely implemented to monitor athletes' responses to training load, probably because of apparent contradictory findings in the literature. In this review I contend that most of the contradictory findings are related to methodological inconsistencies and/or misinterpretation of the data rather than to limitations of heart rate measures to accurately inform on training status. I also provide evidence that measures derived from 5-min (almost daily) recordings of resting (indices capturing beat-to-beat changes in heart rate, reflecting cardiac parasympathetic activity) and submaximal exercise (30- to 60-s average) heart rate are likely the most useful monitoring tools. For appropriate interpretation at the individual level, changes in a given measure should be interpreted by taking into account the error of measurement and the smallest important change of the measure, as well as the training context (training phase, load, and intensity distribution). The decision to use a given measure should be based upon the level of information that is required by the athlete, the marker's sensitivity to changes in training status and the practical constrains required for the measurements. However, measures of heart rate cannot inform on all aspects of wellness, fatigue, and performance, so their use in combination with daily training logs, psychometric questionnaires and non-invasive, cost-effective performance tests such as a countermovement jump may offer a complete solution to monitor training status in athletes participating in aerobic-oriented sports. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3936188 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2014 |
publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-39361882014-02-27 Monitoring training status with HR measures: do all roads lead to Rome? Buchheit, Martin Front Physiol Physiology Measures of resting, exercise, and recovery heart rate are receiving increasing interest for monitoring fatigue, fitness and endurance performance responses, which has direct implications for adjusting training load (1) daily during specific training blocks and (2) throughout the competitive season. However, these measures are still not widely implemented to monitor athletes' responses to training load, probably because of apparent contradictory findings in the literature. In this review I contend that most of the contradictory findings are related to methodological inconsistencies and/or misinterpretation of the data rather than to limitations of heart rate measures to accurately inform on training status. I also provide evidence that measures derived from 5-min (almost daily) recordings of resting (indices capturing beat-to-beat changes in heart rate, reflecting cardiac parasympathetic activity) and submaximal exercise (30- to 60-s average) heart rate are likely the most useful monitoring tools. For appropriate interpretation at the individual level, changes in a given measure should be interpreted by taking into account the error of measurement and the smallest important change of the measure, as well as the training context (training phase, load, and intensity distribution). The decision to use a given measure should be based upon the level of information that is required by the athlete, the marker's sensitivity to changes in training status and the practical constrains required for the measurements. However, measures of heart rate cannot inform on all aspects of wellness, fatigue, and performance, so their use in combination with daily training logs, psychometric questionnaires and non-invasive, cost-effective performance tests such as a countermovement jump may offer a complete solution to monitor training status in athletes participating in aerobic-oriented sports. Frontiers Media S.A. 2014-02-27 /pmc/articles/PMC3936188/ /pubmed/24578692 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2014.00073 Text en Copyright © 2014 Buchheit. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. |
spellingShingle | Physiology Buchheit, Martin Monitoring training status with HR measures: do all roads lead to Rome? |
title | Monitoring training status with HR measures: do all roads lead to Rome? |
title_full | Monitoring training status with HR measures: do all roads lead to Rome? |
title_fullStr | Monitoring training status with HR measures: do all roads lead to Rome? |
title_full_unstemmed | Monitoring training status with HR measures: do all roads lead to Rome? |
title_short | Monitoring training status with HR measures: do all roads lead to Rome? |
title_sort | monitoring training status with hr measures: do all roads lead to rome? |
topic | Physiology |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3936188/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24578692 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2014.00073 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT buchheitmartin monitoringtrainingstatuswithhrmeasuresdoallroadsleadtorome |