monitoring changes in rugby league players ...

P ~ ~ v ~ e p t u a l n n d ~ t lSkrllr, o t o v 2008, 106, 904-916. 0Perceptual and ~LlotorSk~lls2008

MONITORING CHANGES I N RUGBY LEAGUE PLAYERS' PERCEIVED STRESS AND RECOVERY DURING INTENSIFIED TRAINING ' ,Ai\ROX

COUTTS

School oJ Leuare. Sport and Tourism Ctzziersity of Technology, Sydve?

PETER RCABURN

Depaitment qitlealth aizii Hun/o17 Pwfool.mtince Cc*~ii.rzlQueensLand LT~iz.~ei.sity

Surn~warj.-This study assessed whether the Recovery-Stress Questionnaire for Athletes tIiESTQ-Sport) could be used to monitor changes in perceivecl stress and recovery during intensifiecl training of rugby league players. 20 seiniprofessional rugby league players were divided into two equal groups randomly assigned to complete 6 \ a k . of Kormal Training or Intensified Training, each followed with a 7-clay taper. klultistage Fitncss Test performance and RESTQ-Sport measures were talcen at the beginning, at 2-urk. intervals, and at the end of the training period. Endurance significantly decreased vtitli Intensificd Training and returned to baseline levels following the taper, while remaining unchanged in the Norrilal Trainirig group. The RESTQSport scores with training were positively rclated to stress subscale scores (Fatigue, Disturbed Breaks, and General Stress) and recovery subscale measures (Success, Physical Recovery. Being in Shape, Self-efficacy. Social Relaxation, General Well-being, and Sleep Quality] decreasing in tlie Intensified Training group and then normalising follo~vingthe tapcr [Stress subscales: Fatigue and General Stress, and Recovery subscales: Physical Recovcry and General Well-being!. The RESTQ-Sport is a practical psychometric tool fo~.monitoring responses to training in team-sport arhictes.

An imbalance between stress and recovery can lead to sl~ort-termreduction in athletes' performance (overreaching) or, in severe cases, a long-term red~lctionin performance (overtraining) (Kellmann, 2002). Scientific studies documenting overreaching and overtraining in team sports suggest that the incidence of these states in these athletes can be betxveen 30 and 50% during a competitive season (Lehmann, Schnee, Scheu, Stockhausen, & Bachl, 1772; Naessens, Chandler, Kibler, & Driessens, 2000; Kenttii, Hassmtn, & Raglin, 2001). Since overreaching in team-sport athletes can influence the success of a team during competition (Lehmann, et al., 1792; Naessens, et al., 2000; Filaire, Bernain, Sagnol, & Lac, 20011, simple tools are needed which can detect overreaching in these athletes early. Hoxvever, unfortunately for coaches and athletes: imbalances between stress and recovery are difficult to detect. Recent research has shown that a group of trained college soccer players who entered a season xvith inadequate recovery and symptoms of overreaching performed significantly lower on tests of muscular strength, power, Address correspondence to Aaron Coutts, Ph.D., School of Leisure. Sport and Tourism, University of Technology, Sydney. Kuring-gai Campus. P.O. Box 222. Lindiield. NSW 2070, Australia or e-mail [email protected]). DO1 10.2466/PhIS.106.3.901-916

STRESS AKD RECOVERY IN INTENSE TRAINING

905

and sprinting performance and had a more catabolic blood hormone profile during a competition season than a matched group of soccer players who entered the season in a recovered state (Kraenler, French, Paxton, I-Iakkinen, Volek, Sebastianelli, et al., 2004). The results of this study indicate the importance of team-sport athletes entering the season in a recovered state. Also. these findings show that overreaching should be avoided for team-sport athletes during the season, as performance recovery may be difficult to achieve with the demands of regular competition. Unfortunately, there is relatively little research with valid and tloninvasive practical tools which can be used by coaches and team-sport athletes to monitor the recovery and stress state. It is clear development of such tools is needed. Although previous studies have shown that certain hematological, biochemical, hormonal, immunological, and psychological variables are associated with excessive fatigue and overreaching (for reviews see Urhausen & Kindermann, 2002; Halson & Jeukendrup: 2004; Meeusen. Duclos, Gleeson, Rietjens, Steinacker. & Urhausen, 2006), it seems none have established that such markers can be reliably used as an early warning o l impending overreaching. Until recently, there were fear practical tools available to coaches of team sports to monitor the full complexities of recovery and stress states in athletes. However, the development of the nlultidimensional Recovery-Stress Questionnaire for Athletes (RESTQ-Sport) allows systematic measurement of the recovery and stress processes in athletes (Kellmann & Kallus, 1999, 2001). To assess changes in recovery and stress in athletes has significant potential as a tool to monitor athletes who are approaching competition (Kellmann & Kallus, 1999; Kellmann & Gunther, 2000; Kellrnann, Altenburg, Lormes, & Steinacker, 2001; Kalda, Jurimae, & Jurimae, 2001; h,laestu, Jurimae, & Jurimae, 2005; Coutts, Wallace, & Slartery, 2007). To date, there are few studies of validation for the RESTQ-Sport with endurance athletes (Kellinann & Kallus, 1999: Steinacker, Lnrmes, Kellmann, Liu, Reibnecker, Opitz-Gress, et al., 2000; Jurimae, Maestu, Purge, & Jiirirnae, 2004; Maestu, Jiirimae, Kreepiou, & Jurimae, 20061, but apparently tione have applied this tool to team-sport athletes in preparation for a coming season. Although several researchers have suggested that team-sport athletes are at risk of overreaching during periods of high training loads (Kraeiner, et a/.,2004; Coutts, Reaburn, Piva, & Rowsell, 2007) or increased demands of competition (Lehmann, et dl.: 1992; Naessens, et dl., 2000; Filaire, et nl., 2001; Filaire, Lac, & Pequignot, 2003). blonitoritlg changes in stress and recovery in team-sport athletes may assist coaches to control training better so performance can be optimized. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to evaluate whether the RESTQ-Sport could be used to measure changes in stress and recovery dur-

906

A.J. COUTTS & P. RErlBURN

ing intensified training in semiprofessional rugby league pla~ers.A relationship was hypothesized anlong the players' endurance performance, their perception of stress and recovery and the amount of training completed. In particular, intensified training was hypothesized to lead to higher stress scores, lower recovery scores on the RESTQ-Sport, and poorer endurance performance across the 6 ~ v k .of progressive overload training than would normal training. Also, a 7-day taper was hypothesized to lead to improved endurance performance and lower stress and higher recovery scores from the RESTQ-Sport.

participants Twenty rugby league players ilV age: 23.7 fr 3.6 yr.; VO;! lnax 50.1 i 3.6 mL . kg-' . inin.-'; Body Mass Index: 27.4 2.0) from one team volunteered to participate. This teain competed in a state level rugby league conlpetition (Queensland Cup, Australiaj. All players received payment to play for the club; however, as this was not their sole or prinlary source of en~ployment, they were classified as semiprofessional. The study protocol was approved by a University H ~ ~ m aEthics n Review Panel. Each player received written and verbal explanation of the study, which informed then1 of all risks and benefits associated with participation, and written informed consent was obtained.

+

Study Design

h parallel two-group, matched, randomized, longitudinal design was used. The participants were matched according to physical characteristics ( ~max 0 and ~ Body &lass Index) and playing position and then dlvided into either a group who completed 'Intensified Training' or a group u.ho completed 'Normal Training' (Table 1). Training \vas planned so that the Intensified Training group completed progressively more training than the Normal Training group.

~-

TABLE 1 I'HYSICAL CHARACTEKIS~~CS OF BOTHINTEXSIFIFD TRAINING AND NORMAL TMIXINL CROUPS: MEANSAND STANDARDDEVI.~TIONS -

. --

~

~

Training Group

Age (yr.1

SD

A1

\!02lnax

(inL , kg-: , nlin.-') --hl SD

-

Intensified Normal -~

25.1 22.3

Body Mass Index

(kg . m2i

---

bl

~

-

SD

-~

3.1 2.1

50.1 50.2

3.7 1.5

27.6 27.3

1.9 2.1

Physical Training This study was completed during the 'specific preparation' phase of the training year after 10 wk. of 'general preparation' training and a 2-wk. Christ-

~

STRESS AND RECOiTR1' IN INTENSE TRAIAIKG

907

mas break. The participants each completed a 6-ark. period of progressive overload training followed by a 7-day taper. Each week consisted of five to seven sessions per week that included rugby league skills, speed and agility, resistance, and aerobic conditioning. During the final week of the 5-wk. progressive overload training. 12.5 and 8.7 hr. of physical training was completed by the Intensified Training and Norlllal Training group, respectively. Throughout the study, all participants kept a logbook in which they were required to record their training time (minutes) and training intensity for each session. Each participant's perception of the global intensity was rated on Borg's 10-point category ratio scale (Borg, 1982) approxinlately 30 min. after each training session. Training Strain was then calculated according to the methods of Foster, Hector, Welsh, Schrager, Green, and Snyder (1995). Briefly, the training load from each session for each player was calculated from the product of the session duration and their perception of global training intensity (i.e., duration x intensity). The weekly Training Strain was then calculated as the weekly training load multiplied by the standard deviation of the dail) training loads completed during that week (Foster, 1998). Following the 6 ~ l i of. overload training. a11 participants co~npletedthe same taper. A step-reduction tdper consisting of three field sessions and two resistance-training sessions was completed over a 7-day period (Fig. 1). During the taper, there was a reduction in both training time and training intensity. A 7-day taper is common in team sports and has shoa~r7to be eifecti~re for cyclists, rowers, and runners (hlujika & Padilla, 2003). Testing P~ocedures Endumnce perfo?vnnnce.-Endurance performance was measured using the biultistage Fitness Test, a widely used field test for assessing endurance performance in teain sports. It has been used previousl) to assess endurance performance in junior (Gabbett, 20051, amateur (Gabbett, 2OOO), semiprofessional (Gabbett, 2002; Co~ltts,Reaburn, Piva, & Rowsell. 2007). and professional rugby league players (O'Connor, 1996). Aleasures \xrere taken at Baseline, 2 wk.,4 a-k., 6 wk.,and after the taper. For this test, the participants were required to run back and forth along a 20-m grass track, keeping in time with a series of audio slgnals from a compact disc (Australian Coaclling Council, Canberra, ACT). The running speed was progressively increased until the players reached volitional euhaustion. Performance was taken as total distance travelled when the player reached volitional fatigue. Each test was conducted following a standardised warm-up that consisted of subnlaximal running (8 mill.) and stretching (5 min.). The intraclass correlation coefficient for test-retest reliability and typical error of measurement for the test were 0.93 and 3.596, respectively.

A. J . COUTTS & P. REAAURN

1

2

3

4

5

6

Taper

Time (wk.) FIG. 1. 'Weekly [raining strain (,tI?SU! during the 6-wk. overload training and 7-day taper in both the Tntcnsified Training ( m ) and Kormal Trainitlg ! j roups. Weekly training strain mas calculated as the weekly training load (i.c.. sum of training yoads from each session of the daily training loads completed dut.during a wccki multiplied by the standard de~~iation iilg that week (Foster, 19981.

Recove~>y-Stvess Stntc Assessnzent.-The Recovery-Stress Questionnaire for Athletes (KESTQ-Sport) is psychometrically based and is used to assess individuals' recovery-stress state (Kellmann & Kallus, 1999, 2001; Kellmann & Giinther, 2000). Self-reports allow evaluation of physical, subjective, behavioural, and social aspects of stress and recovery. There are 12 basic scales (seven Stress Subscales: General Stress, Emotional Stress, Social Stress, Conflicts or Pressure, Fatigue, Lack of Energy, Physical Complaints; and five Recovery Subscales: Success, Social Relaxation. Physical Relaxation. General Well-being, Sleep Quality), with seven additioi~alsport-specific scales (three Sport-specific Stress Subscales: Fitness, Emotional Exhaustion, Disturbed Breaks; and four Sport-specific Recovery Subscales: Being in Shape, Personal Accomplishment, Self-regulation, Self-efficacy). Each scale has four items that require the participant's response. Each iten1 is rated for frequency on a 7point Liltert-like scale using anchors of 0: Never and 6: Always to indicate how often the respondent participated in stress- or recovery-associated activ ities during the previous 72 hr. The mean of-' each scale can range from 0 to 6, ~vitl1a high score in the stress-associated scales reflecting intense subjective stress, whereas high scores in the recovery-oriented scales mirror appropriate recorery. The internal consistencies and reliability of the RESTQ-Sport have previously been reported as Cronbach a of .67 to .88and test-retest reliability of .51 and .81when measures were taken 24 to 72 hours apart (Kellmann & Kallus, 2001). For the present sample? the value of Cronbach a was '72.

909

STRESS AND RECOVERI' 1N INThNSE TRAINING

The participants completed the KESTQ-Sport five times during the study, once prior to the 6 wk. of overload training and then four additional times: after 2 wk.,4 wk., 6 wk..and after the 7-day taper. The participants completed the RESTQ-Sport in a quiet laboratory at standardised times between 5 3 0 and 7 3 0 am. In this study, mean scores for each subscale were calculated. Prior to the comrnenceinent of the study all participants were baseline tested on a number of performance and physical characteristics. They were then divided into matched p i r s and randomly allocated to either the normal training or intensified training group. All participants nTeretested on all occasions. Scores on the Multistage Fitness Test and RESTQ-Sport were analysed by a two-factor (condition, testing occasion) multivariate repeated-measures analysis of variance with both repeated and simple contrasts. Repeated contrasts were used to analyse progressive changes, \vllereas simple contrasts were used to specify global changes relative to the first testing time. Condition was the between-participant variable [two levels (Intensified Training and Norrnal Training)] and testing occasion (Baseline, 2 wk., 4 wk., 6 wk., and Taper) was the within-participant variable. Standard statistical methods were used for the calculation of means and standard deviations. An alpha ( a )level of 0.05 was used as the criterion for significance. The SPSS statistical softnlare package, Version 11.0(SPSS, Inc., Chicago, IL: USA), was used for all statistical calculations.

Table 2 shoxx~the performance on the Multistage Fitness Test. The niultivariate analysis of variance for repeated measures indicated main effects for Multistage Fitness Test scores over time (F,, ,=21.62, p < ,001) and between groups iF,,,,= 8.11, p = .02). Contrast analysis showed that the mean scores of the Intensified Training group were significantly decreased at 4 and 6 wk. when compared to the baseline mean. Also, mean perforlllance increased

-

Tralnlng Group

-

31

2--

SD

--

-

-

\Y7k R1 SD

Baselme

4 W'k 11 SD

6 \Yk ;If SD

Taper -

AtI

SD

Intensified 2233 172 2215 179 2207 208 1989 218"~' 2369 l Z a 2102 277 2133 274 2180 289-- 2184 272 2236 272 Normal aSignificantly different from previous measure i p < .05). bSignificantly different from ~ a s e l i n c i p < .05). 'Significantly different from Normal Training i p < .05). -

~

-

~

910

A.J. COUTTS si P.KEABURN

significantly for the Intensified Training group lrom 6 u~k.to Taper. There were also significant between-group mean differences at 6 urk.

re cove^^: Sztbscgle Measures Table 3 shows measures of recovery from the KESTQ-Sport during the period of study. There were 110 significant between-group differences in Recovery subscales throughout the study. However, multivariate analysis of variance for repeated measures indicated that the Recovery subscales of Success ( F,,,,=4.23, p = .02), Physical Recovery iF,,,,= 3.66, p = .04), Being in Shape ( F,;, =4.85. p = .02)>Self-efficacy ( F , l j = 4.80, p = .01). Social Relaxation (F,,,, = 6.84, p = .003), General Well-being !F,,,, = 7.96, p = .002) and Sleep Quality (F,,,, = 6.60, p = ,004)decreased following the 6 wk. overload training. Contrast analysis showed that all of these subscales were significantly lower at 1 wk. compared to Baseline in the Intensified Training group. Moreover, the players' mean ratings of Success. Physical Recovery, Being in Shape, Social Relaxation, Self-efficacy, and General Well-being -were also significantly lower at 6 wk. compared to Baseline in the Intensified Training group. The mean rating of General LXTell-beingalso significantly decreased in the NorT2BLE 3 ~~?Q-CPO MRE T ~ NAUD S ?14NDAlUl DEVIATIOVS OF R E c o \ L R I ~ ~ ~ A S L T R\T ED B I ~ ~INF F I AUD 2-3 IC I P U I ~ K \ A L SOF Ox ERLOAD TRAIUING AND 7-DAY%PER FORIP\T E P I ~ I F I E D9 N D h O R h 1 4 ~TFL~INING GROUP$ -

-

-

-

.-

1.7 0 . 4 ' ~ 2.1 2.3 0.6 2.1 0.4 Inrensified2.7 0.7 2.0 0.4 Normal 2.1 0.7 2.3 0.5 2.2 0.7 2.4 2.4 0 . 8 ~ 2.5 3.0 0.9 3.9 0.7' Social Relaxation Intensified 3.2 0.7 2.3 1.0 2.5 Normal 3.1 0.6 2.8 0.8 2.5 0.7 1.7 0.5' 2.3 2.0 0.6' Physical Recovery Intensified 2.5 0.7 2.3 0.7 Normal 2.9 0.9 2.2 1.1 2.7 2.7 0.6 2.7 0.6 1.7 0.4" 2.6 1.0 2.5 General Well-being Intensified 3.0 0.7 3.0 0.8 2.1 Normal 3.2 0.9 2.1 0.7" 3.0 0.5 3.0 0.6 2.8 1.2 Sleep Quality Tntensified 2.1 0.3 2.6 1.0 2.2 1.0 2.7 3.2 0.7' 2.7 0.8' 2.9 Sorinal 1.7 0.5 3.0 0.9' 2.4 Being in Shape Intensifieci 3.2 0.5 2.8 0.7 2.4 0.7' 2.4 0.7 Nvrrnal 2.7 1.0 2.3 1.2 2.7 2.7 0.8 2.9 0.8 2.2 0.6 2.2 0.6 Personal Intensified 2.9 0.9 2.5 0.8 2.2 Acco~nplishmelit Norn7al 2.1 0.; 2.1 0.6 2.2 0.7 2.3 2.2 0.5 3.1 0.5 2.6 Self-efficacy Intensified 3.2 0.5 2.1 O.sab 2.4 0.9' Normal 2.7 0.8 2.7 0.7 2.5 1.2 2.8 2.7 0.6 2.7 0.6 3.0 Self-regulation intensified 3.1 0.7 2.5 0.9 3.0 0.9 Normal 2.8 1.0 2.6 0.9 2.6 2.7 0.7 2.5 0.5 . aSignificantlv -2ifGrenr from previous measurement ( p < ,051. "~ignificanrly differenr Baseline ( p < .05). Success

- -

0.6 0.5 0.7 0.7 0.7' 0.9 0.6" 0.7 0.6 0.8~ 0.6~ 1.0 0.5 0.6 0.5 0.8 0.6 0.9 from

91 1

STRESS AND R E C O E R I ' I N INTENSE TRIIhII\G

ma1 Training group at 6 wk. The Sleep Quality in the Normal Training group was elevated at 2 wk, and remained elevated throughout the study (p< .Oj). Finally, both Physical Recover) and General lYTell-beingwere significantly increased at Taper compared to 6 wk.

Stress Subscale Measures Table 4 shows measures of stress from the RESTQ-Sport during study. Multivariate analysis of variance for repeated measures indicated that the Disturbed Breaks (F,,,, = 7.12, Stress subscales of Fatigue iF,,,5 = 3.19, p = .05)! p = .003), and General Stress (F,,,; =3.38, p = .041were elevated with overload TABLE 4 ESTQ-SPORTMEAKS AND STAKDARTI DF.VIATIOYS OE S ~ R I S&[E.~SURED S .4T BASELINE AND 2-WK. INTER\'.~LS OI; O V E R L OTR~IKIKG ~D AKD 7-DW?~I\PER FORINTEN~IFILD AND NORMAL '1-RAINING CROUPS 3~Ieasure

Training Group

Baseline

M

-

--

SD

-

-

General Stress

Intensified 0.9 Normal 0.6 Emotional Stress Intensified 1.1 Normal 1.0 Social Stress Intensifie~l 0.8 Normal 1.0 Conflict Intensified 1.6 Normal 1.6 Fatigue Intensified 1.6 Normal 1.1 Lack of Eilergy Intensified 1.1 Yormal 1.2 Physical Complaints Intensified 0.9 Norrnal 1.0 Disturbed Breaks Intensified 1.0 Normal 1.0 Fitness-Injur)~ Intensified 1.8 Normal 1.4 Emotional Intensified 1.4 Exhaustion Normal 1.1

1W k . A l 4D

2 Wk. 14 SD

.

-

6 Wk.

hl .

Tapcr

-

SD

111 SD

..

-

1.3 0.7 1.7 0.5" 0.9 0.3 0.7 0.6 0.9 0.6 0.9 0.6 1.0 0.6 0.7 0.7 I .O 0.5 1.3 0.6 I .3 0.8 1.1 0.3 1.1 0.6 1.0 0.6 1.0 0.4 1.2 0.5 0.8 0.4 1.2 0.5 0.9 0.4 1.2 0.7 1.0 0.6 1.1 0.5 1.2 0.6 1.0 0.5 1.4 0.8 17 7 1.4 0.8 1.4 0.5 1.8 0.7 1.9 0.5 1.6 0.6 1.6 (0.4 1.9 0.6d 1.6 0.3 2.2 0.6" 2.8 0.8 1.3 0.4 I 1.4 0.9 1.4 0.4 08 1.5 0.6 1.6 0.8 1.4 0.4 1.5 0.7 1.4 0.5 1.3 0.6 1.0 0.5 1.1 0.5 1.2 0.7 1.3 0.5 1.3 0.5 1.5 0.5 0.9 0.6 1.5 0.9 1.0 0.7 1.1 0.5 1.0 0.5" 2.1 0.6 1.4 0.6 1.6 0.7 1.1 0.7 1.0 0.5 1.2 0.7 1.0 0.7 1.7 0.7 1.9 0.5 2.3 0.8 2.0 1.1 1.7 0.6 1.8 0.6 1.8 0.6 1.5 0.3 1.6 0.9 2.2 0.6 1.8 1.0 1.9 0,9 1.1 0.7 1.0 1.0 1.2 0.5 0.8 0.8 'Significantlr different fro111 revious measurement ( p< ,051. bSignificantly different from Baseline (p < .mi. CSignificanrly &fferent irom Normal Training ( pc. ."TI. ~

0.5 0.5 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.3 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.4 0.6 0.5 0.3 0.5 0.3 0.4 0.1 0.5 1.0 0.8

-

p~~

~

training. Contrasts indicated that both means for Fatigue and Disturbed Breaks were significantl) more elevated in the Intensified Training group at 1 and 6 wk, than ar Baseline. Further. ineat? rated General Stress was also significantl) elevated at 6 mk. compared to Baselme. Finally, both Fatigue and Disturbed Breaks were significantly reduced conlpared to 6 n-k. with the 7-day taper (Taper).&lam effects bet\lof Appiz'ed Physzhlog?. 86,179-184. FILAIRE: E., LAC, G., &PEQUIGKOT. J. A$. (2003) Biological, hormonal, and psychological parameters in professional soccer players tliroughout a competitive season, Perceprua! am1 Motor. Skrllr, 97,1061- 1072. FOSTER,C. (1998) hloilitoring training in athletes with reference to overtraining syndrome. iUcii2'cine €* Science in Sports C E.~ercire.30,1163-1168. FOSTER,C., H ~ C T O RL.. I-., WELSH, R., SCIIRAGER, M.,GREEN,M. A., 8i SNYDER. 4. C. (1995) Effects of specific versus cross-training on running performance. Eu;.opean Journnl of Applzed Physiology, 70.367.372. GARBETT,T. J. 12000) PliJ~siological and anthropometric characteristics ot amateur rugby league players. Bntish journal o f Sports .4,f/ier!ici;ze.33,303-307. GABBETT. 'I: J. (2002) Influence of physiological characteristics 017 selection in a semi-professional first grade rugby league team: a case studv. jol*mal of Spor~s science^, 20.399-405. GABRETT, T J. (2005) Physiological and anthropometric characteristics of junior rugby league players over a competitive season. joziiizal o/Strt,n2tl, atzd Conditioning Rerearel?, 19,7647-

iil.

HAI.SOK.5. L., BRIDGE,h'l. W, ~ , I E E U SR., E ~ RUSSCHAERT, , B., GLLLSOY, &I., JONES,D. A,,8i JEGI