PURPOSE: To examine the effect of different exercise-intensity distributions within a training session on the session rating of perceived exertion (RPE) and to examine the timing of measure on the rating. METHODS: Nineteen junior players (age 16±1 y, height 173±5 cm, body mass 64±6 kg) from a Swiss soccer team were involved in the study. Percentage of heart rate maximum (%HR) and RPE (Borg CR100®) were collected in 4 standardized training sessions (conditions). The Total Quality of Recovery scale (TQR) and a visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain of the lower limbs were used to control for the effect of pretraining fatigue. Every session consisted of three 20-min blocks of different intensities (ie, low-moderate-high) performed in a random order. RPE was collected after every block (RPE5), immediately after the session (RPE-end), and 30 min after the session (RPE30). RESULTS: RPE5s of each block were different depending on the distribution sequence (P<.0001). RPE-end, TQR, and VAS values were not different between conditions (P=.57, P=.55, and P=.96, respectively). The %HR was significantly different between conditions (P=.008), with condition 3 higher than condition 2 (74.1 vs 70.2%, P=.02). Edwards training loads were not significantly different between conditions (P=.09). RPE30 was not different from RPE-end (P>.05). CONCLUSIONS: The current results show that coaches can design training sessions without concern about the influence of the within-session distribution of exercise intensity on session-RPE and that RPE can be collected at the end of the session or 30 min later.
PURPOSE: To examine the effect of different exercise-intensity distributions within a training session on the session rating of perceived exertion (RPE) and to examine the timing of measure on the rating. METHODS: Nineteen junior players (age 16±1 y, height 173±5 cm, body mass 64±6 kg) from a Swiss soccer team were involved in the study. Percentage of heart rate maximum (%HR) and RPE (Borg CR100®) were collected in 4 standardized training sessions (conditions). The Total Quality of Recovery scale (TQR) and a visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain of the lower limbs were used to control for the effect of pretraining fatigue. Every session consisted of three 20-min blocks of different intensities (ie, low-moderate-high) performed in a random order. RPE was collected after every block (RPE5), immediately after the session (RPE-end), and 30 min after the session (RPE30). RESULTS: RPE5s of each block were different depending on the distribution sequence (P<.0001). RPE-end, TQR, and VAS values were not different between conditions (P=.57, P=.55, and P=.96, respectively). The %HR was significantly different between conditions (P=.008), with condition 3 higher than condition 2 (74.1 vs 70.2%, P=.02). Edwards training loads were not significantly different between conditions (P=.09). RPE30 was not different from RPE-end (P>.05). CONCLUSIONS: The current results show that coaches can design training sessions without concern about the influence of the within-session distribution of exercise intensity on session-RPE and that RPE can be collected at the end of the session or 30 min later.
Authors: Jennifer L Russell; Blake D McLean; Franco M Impellizzeri; Donnie S Strack; Aaron J Coutts Journal: Sports Med Date: 2021-01 Impact factor: 11.136
Authors: Jordan L Fox; Robert Stanton; Cody J O'Grady; Masaru Teramoto; Charli Sargent; Aaron T Scanlan Journal: Biol Sport Date: 2021-03-06 Impact factor: 2.806
Authors: Okba Selmi; Ibrahim Ouergui; Antonella Muscella; Giulia My; Santo Marsigliante; Hadi Nobari; Katsuhiko Suzuki; Anissa Bouassida Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-07-31 Impact factor: 4.614