Examination of Coach and Player Perceptions of Recovery and Exertion.

Kraft, JA, Laurent, ML, Green, JM, Helm, J, Roberts, C, and Holt, S. Examination of coach and player perceptions of recovery and exertion. J Strength Cond Res 34(5): 1383-1391, 2020-Monitoring training and recovery are essential for exercise programming. Athletes can validly assess training load (TL) via the session rating of perceived exertion (SRPE) technique. However, it is unclear if coaches can successfully use this model. This study compared coach and athlete perceptions of effort and recovery, and it evaluated the efficacy of perceptually based TL monitoring. Participants included 56 athletes (Women's volleyball, soccer, and basketball and Men's basketball) and their coaches (n = 4). Perceived recovery was estimated via the Perceived Recovery Status scale. Scores of TL were calculated using the Edward's heart rate (HR) method and by multiplying SRPE by duration. Coaches provided an intended SRPE (SRPE-CI) before practice. Also, SRPE was independently estimated by coaches (SRPE-CO) and athletes (SRPE-A) ∼15-20 minutes after practice. Paired t-tests and Pearson's correlations were applied to make comparisons (α ≤ 0.05). Values of SRPE-CI, SRPE-CO, SRPE-A TLs were strongly correlated with Edwards' HR-based TLs (R = 0.74, 0.73, and 0.76, respectively). However, SRPE-CI (5.5 ± 1.9) and SRPE-CO (5.0 ± 1.9) was higher than SRPE-A (4.5 ± 1.9). Coaches estimated recovery higher than athletes (7.1 ± 1.3 vs. 5.8 ± 1.6). Estimates of TL strongly correlated with Edwards' TL regardless of information source (coach or athlete) or time point (SRPE-CI TL or SRPE-CO TL). Results suggest that coaches' perceptions validly indicated TL. Coaches' perceptions provide parallel information (correlated strongly with Edwards TL) but not identical information (demonstrated by differences in SRPE) as athlete perceptions. Differences in perceived recovery indicate that coaches overestimate recovery when compared with athletes' perceptions.

Influence of Experience Level on Physical Activity During Interactive Video Gaming.

BACKGROUND: The ability of interactive video games (IVGs) to individualize physical demands influences their viability as a physical activity option. This study examined the influence of experience level on activity levels and affect resulting from playing a martial arts IVG. METHODS: Twenty participants completed 3 15-minute trials: (1) walking, (2) IVG with no previous experience (INEXP), and (3) IVG activity after 2 hours of practice (EXP) during which heart rate (HR), step counts, metabolic equivalents of task (METs), ratings of perceived exertion (RPE), session RPE, and affect (positive/negative affect, enjoyment) were measured. RESULTS: Mean HR was lower during walking (107 ± 18 bpm) than during INEXP (131 ± 25 bpm) and EXP (120 ± 20 bpm). Peak HR and session RPE were lower for walking than for INEXP and EXP. No difference in mean HR was observed between IVG conditions, but peak HR and session RPE were lower for EXP than for INEXP. Walking resulted in greater postactivity reduction of negative affect; however, the IVG conditions were perceived as more enjoyable. CONCLUSIONS: Although the current IVG provided a greater exercise stimulus than walking, results suggest that user movements become more efficient with greater IVG experience and that exercise outcomes may decrease as a result.

Session ratings of perceived exertion responses during resistance training bouts equated for total work but differing in work rate.

Session ratings of perceived exertion (SRPE) during resistance training may be influenced by specific exercise parameters. The purpose of this study was to examine the influence of work rate (total work per unit time) and recording time on SRPE. Participants performed 3 exercise bouts of bench press, lat pull-down, overhead press, upright row, triceps extension, and biceps curl at 60% of predetermined 1 repetition maximum according to these protocols: (a) 3 sets × 8 repetitions (reps) × 1.5 minutes of recovery, (b) 3 sets × 8 reps × 3 minutes of recovery, and (c) 2 sets × 12 reps × 3 minutes of recovery. Session ratings of perceived exertion for the 3 × 8 × 1.5-minute recovery (5.3 ± 1.8) and 2 × 12 × 3-minute recovery trials (6.2 ± 1.7) were significantly greater vs. 3 × 8 × 3-minute recovery trial (4.2 ± 1.8). The difference approached significance between work rate-matched protocols (p = 0.08). No difference was observed between SRPE at 15 minutes (5.1 ± 1.8) vs. 30 minutes (5.2 ± 1.9) post exercise. Post-set in-task ratings of perceived exertion were higher for the 2 × 12 × 3-minute recovery trial (5.9 ± 1.4) vs. 3 × 8 × 1.5-minute recovery trial (4.8 ± 1.2) and 3 × 8 × 3-minute recovery trial (4.0 ± 1.6). The difference approached significance (p = 0.07) for the 3 × 8 × 3-minute recovery trial vs. 3 × 8 × 1.5-minute recovery trial. Session ratings of perceived exertion responded to changes in work rate with no significant difference at matched work rates, indicating that SRPE is responsive to training load. Results indicated that more proximal monitoring (15 minutes post exercise) yielded reliable estimates of SRPE increasing the practical utility of the measure.

Work distribution influences session ratings of perceived exertion response during resistance exercise matched for total volume.

Session ratings of perceived exertion (SRPE) are sensitive to changes in total work volume and work rate during resistance training. This study examined the influence of work distribution (varied load, set, and repetitions [reps]) on SRPE in 2 resistance exercise trials matched for total work volume (sets × reps × percentage of 1 repetition maximum [% 1RM]) and work rate (total work volume/time). Participants completed a low load/high rep (LLHR) trial (2 sets × 12 reps × 3-minute recovery at ∼60% 1RM) and a high load/low rep (HLLR) trial (3 sets × 6 reps × 1.5-minute recovery at ∼80% 1RM) of the bench press, lat pull-down, overhead press, upright row, triceps extension, and biceps curl. A 2-minute recovery separated each exercise in both trials. Session ratings of perceived exertion and recovery heart rate (HR) were recorded 20 minutes after exercise. Preset and postset RPE and HR were higher for HLLR vs. LLHR (3.1 ± 1.6; 104 ± 15 b·min-1 vs. 2.1 ± 1.3; 98 ± 10 b·min-1) and (5.5 ± 0.9; 139 ± 14 b·min-1 vs. 4.4 ± 0.9; 131 ± 12 b·min-1), respectively. Session RPE was higher for HLLR (5.7 ± 1.4) vs. LLHR (4.3 ± 1.4) with no difference in recovery HR. Session ratings of perceived exertion was greater with higher load despite matched total volumes and work rates. Higher preset acute RPE and HR in HLLR may indicate differences in recovery between sets. Higher postset acute RPE and HR in HLLR indicated increased difficulty of individual sets in HLLR, which likely contributed to SRPE differences. Practitioners can be confident that SRPE accurately reflects changes in training load when the number of sets, reps, and loads are altered within routine training.

The influence of hydration on anaerobic performance: a review.

This review examines the influence of dehydration on muscular strength and endurance and on single and repeated anaerobic sprint bouts. Describing hydration effects on anaerobic performance is difficult because various exercise modes are dominated by anaerobic energy pathways, but still contain inherent physiological differences. The critical level of water deficit (approximately 3-4%; mode dependent) affecting anaerobic performance is larger than the deficit (approximately 2%) impairing endurance performance. A critical performance-duration component (> 30 s) may also exist. Moderate dehydration (approximately 3% body weight; precise threshold depends on work/recovery ratio) impairs repeated anaerobic bouts, which place an increased demand on aerobic metabolism. Interactions between dehydration level, dehydration mode, testing mode, performance duration, and work/recovery ratio during repeated bouts make the dehydration threshold influencing anaerobic performance mode dependent.

Heart rate and perceived exertion during self-selected intensities for exergaming compared to traditional exercise in college-age participants.

Exergames may be useful for promoting physical activity in younger populations. Heart rate (HRs) responses and rating of perceived exertion (RPE) at self-selected intensities were compared in college-age participants during 2 modes of exergame activity vs. traditional exercise. Thirty-seven participants (men: 20, women: 17) completed 3 30-minute self-selected intensity trials: (a) video game interactive bicycle ergometer (GB) (CatEye GB300), (b) interactive video dance game (Dance Dance Revolution [DDR]), and (c) traditional cycle ergometer (CE) while watching television. Mean HR, peak HR (PkHR), and minutes above target HR (THR) were significantly higher for GB (144 ± 22 b · min(-1) [57% HR reserve (HRR)], 161 ± 23 b · min(-1), and 22.5 ± 11.1 minutes) than for DDR (119 ± 16 b · min(-1) [37% HRR], 138 ± 20 b · min(-1), and 11.2 ± 11.9 minutes) or for CE (126 ± 20 b · min(-1) [42% HRR], 144 ± 24 b · min(-1), and 14.2 ± 12.6 minutes). The RPE was significantly higher for GB (4.2 ± 1.5) and CE (3.8 ± 1.2) than for DDR (2.7 ± 1.3). Recovery HR (RecHR) (15 minutes postexercise) was significantly higher for GB (91 ± 14 b · min(-1)) than for DDR (80 ± 11 b · min(-1)) and neared significance vs. CE (84 ± 14 b · min(-1), p = 0.059). No difference in PkHR, RecHR, or minutes above THR was observed between DDR and CE. Session RPE was significantly higher for GB (4.6 ± 1.7) and CE (4.1 ± 1.6) than for DDR (2.8 ± 1.5). All modes elicited extended proportions of time above THR; GB: 75%, DDR: 37%, and CE: 47%. Results support that exergames are capable of eliciting physiological responses necessary for fitness improvements. Practitioners might consider exergames as periodic activity options for clients needing motivation to be regularly active.

Effects of heat exposure and 3% dehydration achieved via hot water immersion on repeated cycle sprint performance.

This study examined effects of heat exposure with and without dehydration on repeated anaerobic cycling. Males (n = 10) completed 3 trials: control (CT), water-bath heat exposure (∼39°C) to 3% dehydration (with fluid replacement) (HE), and similar heat exposure to 3% dehydration (DEHY). Hematocrit increased significantly from pre to postheat immersion in both HE and DEHY. Participants performed 6 × 15s cycle sprints (30s active recovery). Mean Power (MP) was significantly lower vs. CT (596 ± 66 W) for DEHY (569 ± 72 W), and the difference approached significance for HE (582 ± 76 W, p = 0.07). Peak Power (PP) was significantly lower vs. CT (900 ± 117 W) for HE (870 ± 128 W) and approached significance for DEHY (857 ± 145 W, p = 0.07). Postsprint ratings of perceived exertion was higher during DEHY (6.4 ± 2.0) and HE (6.3 ± 1.6) than CT (5.7 ± 2.1). Combined heat and dehydration impaired MP and PP (decrements greatest in later bouts) with HE performance intermediate to CT and DEHY.

Impact of dehydration on a full body resistance exercise protocol.

This study examined effects of dehydration on a full body resistance exercise workout. Ten males completed two trials: heat exposed (with 100% fluid replacement) (HE) and dehydration (approximately 3% body mass loss with no fluid replacement) (DEHY) achieved via hot water bath (approximately 39 degrees C). Following HE and DEHY, participants performed three sets to failure (using predetermined 12 repetition maximum) of bench press, lat pull down, overhead press, barbell curl, triceps press, and leg press with a 2-min recovery between each set and 2 min between exercises. A paired t test showed total repetitions (all sets combined) were significantly lower for DEHY: (144.1 +/- 26.6 repetitions) versus HE: (169.4 +/- 29.1 repetitions). ANOVAs showed significantly lower repetitions (approximately 1-2 repetitions on average) per exercise for DEHY versus HE (all exercises). Pre-set rate of perceived exertion (RPE) and pre-set heart rate (HR) were significantly higher [approximately 0.6-1.1 units on average in triceps press, leg press, and approached significance in lat pull down (P = 0.14) and approximately 6-13 b min(-1) on average in bench press, lat pull down, triceps press, and approached significance for overhead press (P = 0.10)] in DEHY versus HE. Session RPE difference approached significance (DEHY: 8.6 +/- 1.9, HE: 7.4 +/- 2.3) (P = 0.12). Recovery HR was significantly higher for DEHY (116 +/- 15 b min(-1)) versus HE (105 +/- 13 b min(-1)). Dehydration (approximately 3%) impaired resistance exercise performance, decreased repetitions, increased perceived exertion, and hindered HR recovery. Results highlight the importance of adequate hydration during full body resistance exercise sessions.