Rabbani Alireza, Baseri Mohammad Karami, Reisi Jalil, Clemente Filipe Manuel, Kargarfard Mehdi
Department of Exercise Physiology, Faculty of Sport Sciences, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran.
Department of Exercise Physiology, Faculty of Sport Sciences, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran.
Physiol Behav. 2018 Oct 1;194:527-531. doi: 10.1016/j.physbeh.2018.07.001. Epub 2018 Jul 5.
The aims of this study were a) to examine within-group changes of wellness and heart rate variability measures and b) to compare their sensitivity to a congested match schedule in collegiate soccer players (n = 8). Wellness (Hooper index and its subsets) and heart rate variability (Ln rMSSD, SDNN) measures were assessed after selected low-load (training sessions) and high-load (a congested match schedule) phases. Session rating of perceived exertion (sRPE) was computed for training and match sessions. A very likely large difference in accumulated sRPE was observed between low-load and high-load phases (+148.4%, 90% confidence interval CI [87.3; 229.5%]); effect size, ES, 2.16 [1.49; 2.82]. While the Hooper index showed an almost certainly moderate increase (+49.8%, [33.9; 67.5%]), ES, 1.05 [0.76; 1.34], heart rate variability measures (i.e., Ln rMSSD and SDNN) only changed with a possible trivial effect (range -2.1; 8.2%, [-7.1; 16.7%]), ES, -0.15; 0.15 [-0.50; 0.44]. The Hooper index showed a moderately higher sensitivity than Ln rMSSD to a congested match schedule (34.7%, [26.9; 41.6%], ES, 0.81 [0.60; 1.03]). Relationships between changes in the Hooper index and some of its subsets (∆Hooper index, ∆sleep, and ∆fatigue), with changes in mean sRPE (∆sRPE) were very large (range r = 0.72; 0.89). However, small associations were observed between changes in heart rate variability (∆Ln rMSSD, and ∆SDNN) and ∆sRPE (range r = -0.21; 0.10). This study suggests the use of subjective wellness indices, instead of heart rate variability measures, to monitor collegiate soccer players during congested match schedules.
a）检查健康状况和心率变异性指标在组内的变化；b）比较这些指标对大学足球运动员（n = 8）密集比赛赛程的敏感性。在选定的低负荷（训练课）和高负荷（密集比赛赛程）阶段后，对健康状况（Hooper指数及其子指标）和心率变异性（Ln rMSSD、SDNN）指标进行评估。计算训练和比赛场次的主观用力程度评分（sRPE）。观察到低负荷和高负荷阶段之间累积sRPE存在极有可能的巨大差异（+148.4%，90%置信区间CI [87.3；229.5%]）；效应量，ES，2.16 [1.49；2.82]。虽然Hooper指数显示几乎肯定有中度增加（+49.8%，[33.9；67.5%]），ES，1.05 [0.76；1.34]，但心率变异性指标（即Ln rMSSD和SDNN）仅出现可能微不足道的变化（范围-2.1；8.2%，[-7.1；16.7%]），ES，-0.15；0.15 [-0.50；0.44]。Hooper指数对密集比赛赛程的敏感性略高于Ln rMSSD（34.7%，[26.9；41.6%]），ES，0.81 [0.60；1.03]。Hooper指数及其一些子指标的变化（∆Hooper指数、∆睡眠和∆疲劳）与平均sRPE变化（∆sRPE）之间的关系非常大（范围r = 0.72；0.89）。然而，心率变异性变化（∆Ln rMSSD和∆SDNN）与∆sRPE之间观察到小的关联（范围r = -0.21；0.10）。本研究建议在密集比赛赛程期间，使用主观健康指标而非心率变异性指标来监测大学足球运动员。
