Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 13 items for :

Clear All
Restricted access

Teun van Erp, Carl Foster and Jos J. de Koning

training stress score (TSS). A workout of 1 hour on FTP represents a TSS score of 100 AU. Sanders et al 25 investigated the effect of fatigue on the relationship between various TLs in elite cyclists. However, to the best of our knowledge, no study has investigated the effect of different situations on

Restricted access

Teun van Erp, Marco Hoozemans, Carl Foster and Jos J. de Koning

professional cycling. Hunter and Coggan 12 developed an approach to quantify TL based on PO of cyclists using a power meter, the training stress score (TSS). Almost all training analysis software are using TSS as their most important measurement of TL, resulting in being TSS the measure of TL for many

Restricted access

Dajo Sanders, Teun van Erp and Jos J. de Koning

: Edwards training impulse (TRIMP), 9 Training Stress Score (TSS), 11 and session rating of perceived exertion (sRPE). 12 Edwards TRIMP was calculated based on the time spent in the 5 predefined HR zones described above and multiplied by a zone-specific arbitrary weighting factor (zone 1: weighting

Restricted access

Dajo Sanders, Grant Abt, Matthijs K.C. Hesselink, Tony Myers and Ibrahim Akubat

Purpose:

To assess the dose-response relationships between different training-load methods and aerobic fitness and performance in competitive road cyclists.

Methods:

Training data from 15 well-trained competitive cyclists were collected during a 10-wk (December–March) preseason training period. Before and after the training period, participants underwent a laboratory incremental exercise test with gas-exchange and lactate measures and a performance assessment using an 8-min time trial (8MT). Internal training load was calculated using Banister TRIMP, Edwards TRIMP, individualized TRIMP (iTRIMP), Lucia TRIMP (luTRIMP), and session rating of perceived exertion (sRPE). External load was measured using Training Stress Score (TSS).

Results:

Large to very large relationships (r = .54–.81) between training load and changes in submaximal fitness variables (power at 2 and 4 mmol/L) were observed for all training-load calculation methods. The strongest relationships with changes in aerobic fitness variables were observed for iTRIMP (r = .81 [95% CI .51–.93, r = .77 [95% CI .43–.92]) and TSS (r = .75 [95% CI .31–.93], r = .79 [95% CI .40–.94]). The strongest dose-response relationships with changes in the 8MT test were observed for iTRIMP (r = .63 [95% CI .17–.86]) and luTRIMP (r = .70 [95% CI .29–.89).

Conclusions:

Training-load quantification methods that integrate individual physiological characteristics have the strongest dose-response relationships, suggesting this to be an essential factor in the quantification of training load in cycling.

Restricted access

Brandy J. Mailer, Tamara C. Valovich McLeod and R. Curtis Bay

Context:

Clinicians often rely on the self-report symptoms of patients in making clinical decisions; hence it is important that these scales be reliable.

Objective:

To determine the test-retest reliability of healthy youth in completing a graded symptom scale (GSS), modified from the Head Injury Scale Self-Report Concussion Symptoms Scale (HIS).

Design:

Repeated-measures.

Setting:

Middle school classroom.

Patients or Other Participants:

126 middle school students.

Intervention:

A survey consisting of a demographic and life events questionnaire and a GSS asking about symptom severity and duration.

Main Outcomes Measures:

Score for each symptom on the severity and duration scale and a total symptom score (TSS) and the total number of symptoms endorsed (TSE) from the severity scale. Responses on a life events questionnaire were also recorded.

Results:

We found excellent reliability for TSS (ICC = .93) and TSE (ICC = .88) for the severity scale. We found moderate to excellent reliability on the individual symptoms of both the severity (ICC = .65-.89) and duration (ICC =.56-.96) scales.

Conclusions:

Healthy youth can reliably self-report symptoms using a GSS. This patient-oriented outcome measure should be incorporated into more investigations in this age group.

Restricted access

Raquel Aparicio-Ugarriza, Raquel Pedrero-Chamizo, María del Mar Bibiloni, Gonzalo Palacios, Antoni Sureda, Agustín Meléndez-Ortega, Josep Antoni Tur Marí and Marcela González-Gross

questions about time spent walking, time spent doing housework, and time spent sitting per day (TSS); these questions were bounded. Answers included 6 options classified as less than 1 hour, between 1 and 2 hours, between 2 and 3 hours, between 3 and 4 hours, between 4 and 5 hours, and more than 5 hours

Restricted access

Alice M. Wallett, Amy L. Woods, Nathan Versey, Laura A. Garvican-Lewis, Marijke Welvaert and Kevin G. Thompson

recovery 2 weeks were completed at 120%, 141%, 147%, 79%, and 73% of the baseline week training load, respectively (Figure  1 ). Training load was calculated via training stress scores (TSSs) using TrainingPeaks (Boulder, CO) online software. TSS was calculated using the duration and intensity of each

Restricted access

Richelle M. Williams, R. Curtis Bay and Tamara C. Valovich McLeod

, including means (standard deviations) and counts (percentages), as appropriate, are provided for demographic and outcome variables. Total symptoms endorsed (TSE) was calculated by summing the number of symptoms with a severity score > 0, while total symptom severity (TSS) was calculated by summing the

Restricted access

Bouwien Smits-Engelsman, Wendy Aertssen and Emmanuel Bonney

.530 Side jump, no −0.049 (0.013) −0.332 (−0.075 to 0.022) <.001 −3.615 Long jump, cm 0.000 (0.007) 0.030 (−0.014 to 0.013) .96 −0.053 MABC-2 (TSS) −1.500 (0.057) −0.199 (−0.264 to −0.036) .01 −2.610 BMI, kg/m 2 0.060 (0.041) 0.121 (−0.022 to 0.142) .15 1.49 Age, y −0.371 (0.132) −0.234 (−0.632 to −0

Restricted access

Mònica Solana-Tramunt, Jose Morales, Bernat Buscà, Marina Carbonell and Lara Rodríguez-Zamora

removed after the Rec assessment. To minimize potential instrumentation bias, swimmers wore their HR monitors for the TSs that occurred 1 week prior to the last testing session. 2 , 7 We assessed HR from rate-to-rate intervals and transferred the measurements to the Suunto Movescount App (version 2