In elite basketball, players are exposed to intensified competition periods when participating in both national and international competitions. How coaches manage training between matches and in reference to match scheduling for a full season is not yet known. Purpose: First, to compare load during short-term match congestion (ie, ≥2-match weeks) with regular competition (ie, 1-match weeks) in elite male professional basketball players. Second, to determine changes in well-being, recovery, neuromuscular performance, and injuries and illnesses between short-term match congestion and regular competition. Methods: Sixteen basketball players (age 24.8 [2.0] y, height 195.8 [7.5] cm, weight 94.8 [14.0] kg, body fat 11.9% [5.0%], VO2max 51.9 [5.3] mL·kg−1·min−1) were monitored during a full season. Session rating of perceived exertion (s-RPE) was obtained, and load was calculated (s-RPE × duration) for each training session or match. Perceived well-being (fatigue, sleep quality, general muscle soreness, stress levels, and mood) and total quality of recovery were assessed each training day. Countermovement jump height was measured, and a list of injuries and illnesses was collected weekly using the adapted Oslo Sports Trauma Research Center Questionnaire on Health Problems. Results: Total load (training sessions and matches; P
Runners often sustain lower extremity injuries (19-79%) (van Gent et al, 2007). In a theoretical model it has been described that a disturbance in perceived stress and recovery can increase the risk of sustaining an injury (Williams & Andersen, 1998). Therefore, the purpose of this study was to investigate changes in perceived stress and recovery preceding an injury of competitive runners.Methods: Twenty-four competitive runners were monitored over one full training season (46 weeks). Every week, the runners filled an on-line RESTQ-sport (Nederhof et al, 2008). Furthermore, runners and their coaches kept a log with injuries and physical complaints. A non-traumatic injury was defined as any pain, soreness or injury that was not caused by trauma and resulted from training and led to a decrease in training duration or training intensity for at least one week (Jacobsson et al, 2013). Because baseline levels of perception of stress and recovery vary largely between runners, the 19 scales of the RESTQ-Sport were normalized to Z-scores based on the runner’s individual average and standard deviation of the whole season (excl. injured periods). The normalized scores of 1, 2 and 3 weeks before the first sustained injury were compared to 0, which is the average normalized score, by repeated measures ANOVA’s.Results: Twenty-two runners sustained a non-traumatic lower extremity injury. Eight of these runners filled out the RESTQ-Sport all 3 weeks preceding the injury and their data was used for further analysis. The injuries sustained were non-traumatic injuries of the knee, Achilles tendon, ankle, foot and shin. It was shown that 1 week preceding the injury, runners scored lower than the average normalized score on “Success” (Z-score: -0.68±0.62) and 2 weeks preceding the injury runners scored higher than their average on “Fitness/Injuries” (Z-score: 1.04±1.12).Discussion: A decrease in perceived success may be a marker to predict a non-traumatic lower extremity injury. Also an increase in the perception of muscle ache, soreness, pain and vulnerability to injury (“Fitness/Injury”) preceded injuries. Thereby, monitoring changes in individual stress and recovery may help to prevent non-traumatic injuries.
Purpose: This study aims to capture the complex clinical reasoning process during tailoring of exercise and dietary interventions to adverse effects and comorbidities of patients with ovarian cancer receiving chemotherapy. Methods: Clinical vignettes were presented to expert physical therapists (n = 4) and dietitians (n = 3). Using the think aloud method, these experts were asked to verbalize their clinical reasoning on how they would tailor the intervention to adverse effects of ovarian cancer and its treatment and comorbidities. Clinical reasoning steps were categorized in questions raised to obtain additional information; anticipated answers; and actions to be taken. Questions and actions were labeled according to the evidence-based practice model. Results: Questions to obtain additional information were frequently related to the patients’ capacities, safety or the etiology of health issues. Various hypothetical answers were proposed which led to different actions. Suggested actions by the experts included extensive monitoring of symptoms and parameters, specific adaptations to the exercise protocol and dietary-related patient education. Conclusions: Our study obtained insight into the complex process of clinical reasoning, in which a variety of patient-related variables are used to tailor interventions. This insight can be useful for description and fidelity assessment of interventions and training of healthcare professionals.
MULTIFILE
