measures challenging for assessing internal training load (TL). Subjective measures of exercise intensity, such as the rating of perceived exertion (RPE) 4 and session RPE (sRPE), 5 have become widely used to quantify internal TL, as they can be easily administered and interpreted. The TL is calculated
Search Results
Session RPE During Prolonged Exercise Training
Andrea Fusco, Christine Knutson, Charles King, Richard P. Mikat, John P. Porcari, Cristina Cortis, and Carl Foster
The Validity of the Session-RPE Method for Quantifying Training Load in Water Polo
Corrado Lupo, Laura Capranica, and Antonio Tessitore
Context:
The assessment of internal training load (ITL) using the session rating of perceived exertion (session RPE) has been demonstrated to provide valuable information, also in team sports. Nevertheless, no studies have investigated the use of this method during youth water polo training.
Purpose:
To evaluate youth water polo training, showing the corresponding level of reliability of the session-RPE method.
Methods:
Thirteen male youth water polo players (age 15.6 ± 0.5 y, height 1.80 ± 0.06 m, body mass 72.7 ± 7.8 kg) were monitored during 8 training sessions (80 individual training sessions) over 10 d. The Edwards summated heart-rate-zone method was used as a reference measure of ITL; the session-RPE rating was obtained using CR-10 scale modified by Foster. The Pearson product–moment was applied to regress the Edwards heart-rate-zone method against CR-10 session RPE for each training session and individual data.
Results:
Analyses reported overall high (r = .88, R 2 = .78) and significant (P < .001) correlations between the Edwards heart-rate and session-RPE methods. Significant correlations were also shown for each training session (r range .69–.92, R 2 range .48–.85, P < .05) and individual data (r range .76–.98, R 2 range .58–.97, P < .05).
Discussion:
The results confirmed that the session-RPE method as an easy and reliable tool to evaluate ITL in youth water polo, allowing coaches to efficiently monitor their training plans.
The Construct Validity of Session RPE During an Intensive Camp in Young Male Taekwondo Athletes
Monoem Haddad, Anis Chaouachi, Carlo Castagna, Del P. Wong, David G. Behm, and Karim Chamari
Purpose:
The session rating of perceived exertion (RPE) is a practical and non-invasive method that allows a quantification of the internal training load (TL) in individual and team sports, but no study has investigated its construct validity in martial arts. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to examine the convergent validity between the session-RPE method and two objective HR-based methods for quantifying the similar TL during a high-TL camp in young Taekwondo (TKD) athletes.
Methods:
Ten young TKD athletes (mean ± SD: age, 13.1 ± 2.4 y; body mass, 46.1 ± 12.7 kg; height, 1.53 ± 0.15 m; maximum heart rate (HRmax), 201.0 ± 8.2 bpm) participated in this study. During the training period, subjects performed 35 TKD training sessions, including two formal competitions during which RPE and HR were recorded and analyzed (308 individual training sessions). Correlation analysis was used to evaluate the convergent validity between session-RPE method and the two commonly used HR-based methods for assessing TL in a variety of training modes.
Results:
Significant relationships were found between individual session-RPE and all the HR-based TLs (r values from 0.55 to 0.90; P < .001). Significant correlations were observed in all mode of exercises practiced in TKD.
Conclusions:
This study shows that session-RPE can be considered as a valid method to assess TL in TKD.
The Use of Session-RPE Method for Quantifying Training Load in Diving
Carlo Minganti, Laura Capranica, Romain Meeusen, and Maria Francesca Piacentini
Purpose:
The aim of the present study was to assess the effectiveness of perceived exertion (session-RPE) in quantifying internal training load in divers.
Methods:
Six elite divers, three males (age, 25.7 ± 6.1 y; stature, 1.71 ± 0.06 m; body mass, 66.7 ± 1.2 kg) and three females (age, 25.3 ± 0.6 y; stature, 1.63 ± 0.05 m; body mass, 58.3 ± 4.0 kg) were monitored during six training sessions within a week, which included 1 m and 3 m springboard dives. The Edwards summated heart rate zone method was used as a reference measure; the session-RPE rating was obtained using the CR-10 Borg scale modified by Foster and the 100 mm visual analog scale (VAS).
Results:
Significant correlations were found between CR-10 and VAS session-RPE and the Edwards summated heart rate zone method for training sessions (r range: 0.71–0.96; R 2 range: 0.50–0.92; P < 0.01) and for divers (r range: 0.67–0.96; R 2 range: 0.44–0.92; P < 0.01).
Conclusions:
These findings suggest that session-RPE can be useful for monitoring internal training load in divers.
Comparison of RPE (Rating of Perceived Exertion) Scales for Session RPE
Blaine E. Arney, Reese Glover, Andrea Fusco, Cristina Cortis, Jos J. de Koning, Teun van Erp, Salvador Jaime, Richard P. Mikat, John P. Porcari, and Carl Foster
to quantify internal TL using a modification of the rating of perceived exertion (RPE) method developed by Borg. 6 This method is known as the session RPE (sRPE). The sRPE is derived by multiplying the overall RPE obtained at the end of a training session, using the Borg category-ratio 10 scale
Quantifying Training Load: A Comparison of Subjective and Objective Methods
Jill Borresen and Michael I. Lambert
Purpose:
To establish the relationship between a subjective (session rating of perceived exertion [RPE]) and 2 objective (training impulse [TRIMP]) and summated-heart-rate-zone (SHRZ) methods of quantifying training load and explain characteristics of the variance not accounted for in these relationships.
Methods:
Thirty-three participants trained ad libitum for 2 wk, and their heart rate (HR) and RPE were recorded to calculate training load. Subjects were divided into groups based on whether the regression equations over- (OVER), under- (UNDER), or accurately predicted (ACCURATE) the relationship between objective and subjective methods.
Results:
A correlation of r = .76 (95% CI: .56 to .88) occurred between TRIMP and session-RPE training load. OVER spent a greater percentage of training time in zone 4 of SHRZ (ie, 80% to 90% HRmax) than UNDER (46% ± 8% vs 25% ± 10% [mean ± SD], P = .008). UNDER spent a greater percentage of training time in zone 1 of SHRZ (ie, 50% to 60% HRmax) than OVER (15% ± 8% vs 3% ± 3%, P = .005) and ACCURATE (5% ± 3%, P = .020) and more time in zone 2 of SHRZ (ie, 60% to 70%HRmax) than OVER (17% ± 6% vs 7% ± 6%, P = .039). A correlation of r = .84 (.70 to .92) occurred between SHRZ and session-RPE training load. OVER spent proportionally more time in Zone 4 than UNDER (45% ± 8% vs 25% ± 10%, P = .018). UNDER had a lower training HR than ACCURATE (132 ± 10 vs 148 ± 12 beats/min, P = .048) and spent more time in zone 1 than OVER (15% ± 8% vs 4% ± 3%, P = .013) and ACCURATE (5% ± 3%, P = .015).
Conclusions:
The session-RPE method provides reasonably accurate assessments of training load compared with HR-based methods, but they deviate in accuracy when proportionally more time is spent training at low or high intensity.
Protection Against Spikes in Workload With Aerobic Fitness and Playing Experience: The Role of the Acute:Chronic Workload Ratio on Injury Risk in Elite Gaelic Football
Shane Malone, Mark Roe, Dominic A. Doran, Tim J. Gabbett, and Kieran D. Collins
Purpose:
To examine the association between combined session rating of perceived exertion (RPE) workload measures and injury risk in elite Gaelic footballers.
Methods:
Thirty-seven elite Gaelic footballers (mean ± SD age 24.2 ± 2.9 y) from 1 elite squad were involved in a single-season study. Weekly workload (session RPE multiplied by duration) and all time-loss injuries (including subsequent-wk injuries) were recorded during the period. Rolling weekly sums and wk-to-wk changes in workload were measured, enabling the calculation of the acute:chronic workload ratio by dividing acute workload (ie, 1-weekly workload) by chronic workload (ie, rolling-average 4-weekly workload). Workload measures were then modeled against data for all injuries sustained using a logistic-regression model. Odds ratios (ORs) were reported against a reference group.
Results:
High 1-weekly workloads (≥2770 arbitrary units [AU], OR = 1.63–6.75) were associated with significantly higher risk of injury than in a low-training-load reference group (<1250 AU). When exposed to spikes in workload (acute:chronic workload ratio >1.5), players with 1 y experience had a higher risk of injury (OR = 2.22) and players with 2–3 (OR = 0.20) and 4–6 y (OR = 0.24) of experience had a lower risk of injury. Players with poorer aerobic fitness (estimated from a 1-km time trial) had a higher injury risk than those with higher aerobic fitness (OR = 1.50–2.50). An acute:chronic workload ratio of (≥2.0) demonstrated the greatest risk of injury.
Conclusions:
These findings highlight an increased risk of injury for elite Gaelic football players with high (>2.0) acute:chronic workload ratios and high weekly workloads. A high aerobic capacity and playing experience appears to offer injury protection against rapid changes in workload and high acute:chronic workload ratios. Moderate workloads, coupled with moderate to high changes in the acute:chronic workload ratio, appear to be protective for Gaelic football players.
The Influence of In-Season Training Loads on Injury Risk in Professional Rugby Union
Matthew J. Cross, Sean Williams, Grant Trewartha, Simon P.T. Kemp, and Keith A. Stokes
Purpose:
To explore the association between in-season training-load (TL) measures and injury risk in professional rugby union players.
Methods:
This was a 1-season prospective cohort study of 173 professional rugby union players from 4 English Premiership teams. TL (duration × session-RPE) and time-loss injuries were recorded for all players for all pitch- and gym-based sessions. Generalized estimating equations were used to model the association between in-season TL measures and injury in the subsequent week.
Results:
Injury risk increased linearly with 1-wk loads and week-to-week changes in loads, with a 2-SD increase in these variables (1245 AU and 1069 AU, respectively) associated with odds ratios of 1.68 (95% CI 1.05–2.68) and 1.58 (95% CI 0.98–2.54). When compared with the reference group (<3684 AU), a significant nonlinear effect was evident for 4-wk cumulative loads, with a likely beneficial reduction in injury risk associated with intermediate loads of 5932–8651 AU (OR 0.55, 95% CI 0.22–1.38) (this range equates to around 4 wk of average in-season TL) and a likely harmful effect evident for higher loads of >8651 AU (OR 1.39, 95% CI 0.98–1.98).
Conclusions:
Players had an increased risk of injury if they had high 1-wk cumulative loads (1245 AU) or large week-to-week changes in TL (1069 AU). In addition, a U-shaped relationship was observed for 4-wk cumulative loads, with an apparent increase in risk associated with higher loads (>8651 AU). These measures should therefore be monitored to inform injury-risk-reduction strategies.
Coaches’ and Players’ Perceptions of Training Dose: Not a Perfect Match
Michel S. Brink, Wouter G.P. Frencken, Geir Jordet, and Koen A.P.M. Lemmink
Purpose:
The aim of the current study was to investigate and compare coaches’ and players’ perceptions of training dose for a full competitive season.
Methods:
Session rating of perceived exertion (RPE), duration, and training load (session RPE × duration) of 33 professional soccer players (height 178.2 ± 6.6 cm, weight 70.5 ± 6.4 kg, percentage body fat 12.2 ± 1.6) from an under-19 and under-17 (U17) squad were compared with the planned periodization of their professional coaches. Before training, coaches filled in the session rating of intended exertion (RIE) and duration (min) for each player. Players rated session RPE and training duration after each training session.
Results:
Players perceived their intensity and training load (2446 sessions in total) as significantly harder than what was intended by their coaches (P < .0001). The correlations between coaches’ and players’ intensity (r = .24), duration (r = .49), and load (r = .41) were weak (P < .0001). Furthermore, for coach-intended easy and intermediate training days, players reported higher intensity and training load (P < .0001). For hard days as intended by the coach, players reported lower intensity, duration, and training load (P < .0001). Finally, first-year players from the U17 squad perceived training sessions as harder than second-year players (P < .0001).
Conclusion:
The results indicate that young elite soccer players perceive training as harder than what was intended by the coach. These differences could lead to maladaptation to training. Monitoring of the planned and perceived training load of coaches and players may optimize performance and prevent players from overtraining.
How Does Interval-Training Prescription Affect Physiological and Perceptual Responses?
Stephen Seiler and Øystein Sylta
The purpose of this study was to compare physiological responses and perceived exertion among well-trained cyclists (n = 63) performing 3 different high-intensity interval-training (HIIT) prescriptions differing in work-bout duration and accumulated duration but all prescribed with maximal session effort. Subjects (male, mean ± SD 38 ± 8 y, VO2peak 62 ± 6 mL · kg–1 · min–1) completed up to 24 HIIT sessions over 12 wk as part of a training-intervention study. Sessions were prescribed as 4 × 16, 4 × 8, or 4 × 4 min with 2-min recovery periods (8 sessions of each prescription, balanced over time). Power output, HR, and RPE were collected during and after each work bout. Session RPE was reported after each session. Blood lactate samples were collected throughout the 12 wk. Physiological and perceptual responses during >1400 training sessions were analyzed. HIIT sessions were performed at 95% ± 5%, 106% ± 5%, and 117% ± 6% of 40-min time-trial power during 4 × 16-, 4 × 8-, and 4 × 4-min sessions, respectively, with peak HR in each work bout averaging 89% ± 2%, 91% ± 2%, and 94% ± 2% HRpeak. Blood lactate concentrations were 4.7 ± 1.6, 9.2 ± 2.4, and 12.7 ± 2.7 mmol/L. Despite the common prescription of maximal session effort, RPE and sRPE increased with decreasing accumulated work duration (AWD), tracking relative HR. Only 8% of 4 × 16-min sessions reached RPE 19–20, vs 61% of 4 × 4-min sessions. The authors conclude that within the HIIT duration range, performing at “maximal session effort” over a reduced AWD is associated with higher perceived exertion both acutely and postexercise. This may have important implications for HIIT prescription choices.
