Monitoring training to assess changes in fitness and fatigue: The effects of training in heat and hypoxia

Crowcroft, S; Duffield, R; Mccleave, E; Slattery, K; Wallace, LK; Coutts, AJ

Monitoring training to assess changes in fitness and fatigue: The effects of training in heat and hypoxia

Crowcroft, S Duffield, R

Mccleave, E Slattery, K Wallace, LK

Coutts, AJ

Permalink

Publication Type:: Journal Article
Citation:: Scandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in Sports, 2015, 25 (S1), pp. 287 - 295
Issue Date:: 2015-01-01

Closed Access

	Filename	Description	Size
	Crowcroft_et_al-2015-Scandinavian_Journal_of_Medicine_&_Science_in_Sports (1).pdf	Published Version	427.24 kB	Adobe PDF	View/Open

Copyright Clearance Process

Recently Added
In Progress
Closed Access

This item is closed access and not available.

Full metadata record

Field	Value	Language
dc.contributor.author	Crowcroft, S	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Duffield, R https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5641-1314	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Mccleave, E	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Slattery, K	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Wallace, LK https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7561-1303	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Coutts, AJ https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1782-7691	en_US
dc.date.available	2014-10-11	en_US
dc.date.issued	2015-01-01	en_US
dc.identifier.citation	Scandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in Sports, 2015, 25 (S1), pp. 287 - 295	en_US
dc.identifier.issn	0905-7188	en_US
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10453/41936
dc.description.abstract	© 2015 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. This study examined the association between monitoring tools, training loads, and performance in concurrent heat and hypoxia (H+H) compared with temperate training environments. A randomized parallel matched-group design involved 18 well-trained male cyclists. Participants performed 12 interval sessions (3 weeks) in either H+H (32±1°C, 50% RH, 16.6% O<inf>2</inf> normobaric hypoxia) or control (21°C, 50% RH, 21% O<inf>2</inf>), followed by a seven-session taper (3 weeks; 21°C, 50% RH, 21% O<inf>2</inf>), while also maintaining external training (∼6-10h/week). A 20-km time trial (TT) was completed pre- and post-training block (21°C, 50% RH, 21% O<inf>2</inf>). Before each TT and once weekly, a 4-min cycle warm-up (70% 4-min mean maximum power) was completed. Visual analog scale rating for pain, recovery, and fatigue was recorded before the warm-up, with heart rate (HR<inf>Ex</inf>), heart rate recovery (HRR), and rating of perceived exertion (RPE<inf>WU</inf>) recorded following. Training load was quantified using the session rating of perceived exertion (sRPE) method throughout. Overall TT improved 35±47s with moderate correlations to HRR (r=0.49) and recovery (r=-0.55). H+H group had a likely greater reduction in HR<inf>Ex</inf> [ES=-0.50 (90% CL) (-0.88; 0.12)] throughout and a greater sRPE (ES=1.20 [0.41; 1.99]), and reduction in HRR [ES=-0.37 (-0.70;-0.04)] through the overload. RPE<inf>WU</inf> was associated with weekly training load (r=0.37). These findings suggest that recovery and HRR in a temperate environment may be used as simple measures to identify an athlete's readiness to perform. Alternatively, the relationship of RPE<inf>WU</inf> and training load suggests that perception of effort following a standardized warm-up may be a valid measure when monitoring an athlete's training response, irrespective of the training environment.	en_US
dc.relation.ispartof	Scandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in Sports	en_US
dc.relation.isbasedon	10.1111/sms.12364	en_US
dc.subject.classification	Sport Sciences	en_US
dc.subject.mesh	Humans	en_US
dc.subject.mesh	Fatigue	en_US
dc.subject.mesh	Adult	en_US
dc.subject.mesh	Bicycling	en_US
dc.subject.mesh	Exercise Test	en_US
dc.subject.mesh	Heart Rate	en_US
dc.subject.mesh	Hot Temperature	en_US
dc.subject.mesh	Hypoxia	en_US
dc.subject.mesh	Male	en_US
dc.subject.mesh	Monitoring, Physiologic	en_US
dc.subject.mesh	Physical Exertion	en_US
dc.subject.mesh	Physical Fitness	en_US
dc.subject.mesh	Single-Blind Method	en_US
dc.title	Monitoring training to assess changes in fitness and fatigue: The effects of training in heat and hypoxia	en_US
dc.type	Journal Article
utslib.citation.volume	S1	en_US
utslib.citation.volume	25	en_US
utslib.for	111602 Human Biophysics	en_US
utslib.for	1106 Human Movement and Sports Sciences	en_US
utslib.for	1116 Medical Physiology	en_US
pubs.embargo.period	Not known	en_US
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Health
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Health/Sports and Exercise Science
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Strength - CHSP - Health Services and Practice
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Strength - CHT - Health Technologies
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Students
utslib.copyright.status	closed_access
pubs.issue	S1	en_US
pubs.publication-status	Published	en_US
pubs.volume	25	en_US

Abstract:

© 2015 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. This study examined the association between monitoring tools, training loads, and performance in concurrent heat and hypoxia (H+H) compared with temperate training environments. A randomized parallel matched-group design involved 18 well-trained male cyclists. Participants performed 12 interval sessions (3 weeks) in either H+H (32±1°C, 50% RH, 16.6% O2 normobaric hypoxia) or control (21°C, 50% RH, 21% O2), followed by a seven-session taper (3 weeks; 21°C, 50% RH, 21% O2), while also maintaining external training (∼6-10h/week). A 20-km time trial (TT) was completed pre- and post-training block (21°C, 50% RH, 21% O2). Before each TT and once weekly, a 4-min cycle warm-up (70% 4-min mean maximum power) was completed. Visual analog scale rating for pain, recovery, and fatigue was recorded before the warm-up, with heart rate (HREx), heart rate recovery (HRR), and rating of perceived exertion (RPEWU) recorded following. Training load was quantified using the session rating of perceived exertion (sRPE) method throughout. Overall TT improved 35±47s with moderate correlations to HRR (r=0.49) and recovery (r=-0.55). H+H group had a likely greater reduction in HREx [ES=-0.50 (90% CL) (-0.88; 0.12)] throughout and a greater sRPE (ES=1.20 [0.41; 1.99]), and reduction in HRR [ES=-0.37 (-0.70;-0.04)] through the overload. RPEWU was associated with weekly training load (r=0.37). These findings suggest that recovery and HRR in a temperate environment may be used as simple measures to identify an athlete's readiness to perform. Alternatively, the relationship of RPEWU and training load suggests that perception of effort following a standardized warm-up may be a valid measure when monitoring an athlete's training response, irrespective of the training environment.

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10453/41936