The Experts below are selected from a list of 978 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Claudio E. Kater - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
SAT-LB4 Novel Hormonal and Metabolic Markers of Recovery From Overtraining Syndrome Unveiled by the Longitudinal ARM of the Eros Study - the Eros-Longitudinal Study
Journal of the Endocrine Society, 2020Co-Authors: Flavio A. Cadegiani, Pedro Luiz H Da Silva, Tatiana P C Abrao, Claudio E. KaterAbstract:Abstract Background: Overtraining Syndrome (OTS) is an unexplained underperformance Syndrome triggered by excessive training, insufficient caloric intake, inadequate sleep, and excessive cognitive and social demands. Investigations of markers of the challenging recovery from OTS have not been reported to date. The objective of the present study is to describe novel markers, and biochemical and clinical behaviors during the restoration process of OTS.Design: A 12-week interventional protocol in 12 athletes affected by OTS was conducted, including increased food intake, transitory interruption of the trainings, improvement of sleep quality, and management of stress.Methods: We assessed 50 parameters, including hormonal responses to an insulin tolerance test (ITT), basal hormonal and non-hormonal biochemical markers, body metabolism and composition. Results: In response to an ITT, early cortisol (p = 0.026), early GH (p = 0.004), and late GH (p = 0.037) improved significantly. Basal estradiol (p = 0.0002) and nocturnal urinary catecholamines, (p = 0.043) reduced, while testosterone (p = 0.014), testosterone:estradiol (T:E) ratio (p = 0.0005), freeT3 (p = 0.043), IGF-1 (p = 0.003), and cortisol awakening response (CAR) (p = 0.001) increased significantly. All basal parameters and early responses to ITT normalized, when compared to healthy athletes. Basal metabolic rate, fat oxidation, body fat, muscle mass, and hydration status had partial but non-significant improvements. Conclusion: After 12 weeks, athletes affected by actual OTS demonstrated substantial improvements, remarkably IGF-1, freeT3, CAR, testosterone, estradiol testosterone:estradiol ratio, CK and catecholamines, and early cortisol, early prolactin, and overall GH responses to stimulations.
-
Diagnosis of Overtraining Syndrome: Results of the Endocrine and Metabolic Responses on Overtraining Syndrome Study: EROS-DIAGNOSIS.
Open access journal of sports medicine, 2020Co-Authors: Flavio A. Cadegiani, Pedro Henrique Luiz Da Silva, Tatiana Camargo Pereira Abrao, Claudio E. KaterAbstract:Objectives Overtraining Syndrome (OTS), a common dysfunction among elite athletes, causes decreased performance and fatigue and has no standardized diagnostic criteria. The Endocrine and Metabolic Responses on Overtraining Syndrome (EROS) study identified more than 45 potential biomarkers of OTS. In the present study, we hypothesized that combinations of these biomarkers could be an accurate diagnostic tool for OTS. Methods We selected parameters with largest difference and fewest overlapping results compared to healthy athletes and highest feasibility and reproducibility. Among the multiple combinations attempted, we chose those that did not show overlapping results, according to the objective. Results We included 11 clinical parameters, 4 basal hormones, and 5 hormonal responses in Insulin Tolerance Test (ITT). The three selected diagnostic tools were the (i) EROS-CLINICAL, with only clinical parameters, which was suitable as an initial assessment for athletes suspected of OTS; (ii) EROS-SIMPLIFIED, with clinical parameters and basal hormones, when the EROS-CLINICAL was inconclusive; and (iii) EROS-COMPLETE, with basal and hormonal responses to stimulation tests, which was valuable for population-based screening, research purposes, and unusual presentations of OTS. Conclusion We identified innovative tools with 100% accuracy for the diagnosis of OTS, without the need to exclude confounding disorders.
-
Novel causes and consequences of Overtraining Syndrome: the EROS-DISRUPTORS study.
Sports Medicine Arthroscopy Rehabilitation Therapy & Technology, 2019Co-Authors: Flavio A. Cadegiani, Claudio E. KaterAbstract:Hormonal physiology in athletes, dysfunctional paths leading to Overtraining Syndrome (OTS), and clinical and biochemical behaviors that are independently modified by the presence of OTS remain unclear. Although multiple markers of OTS have recently been identified, the independent influence of OTS on hormones and metabolism have not been assessed. Hence, the objective of the present study was to uncover the previously unrecognized independent predictors of OTS and understand how OTS independently modifies the behaviors of clinical and biochemical parameters. In a total of 39 athletes (OTS-affected athletes (OTS) = 14 and healthy athletes (ATL) = 25), we performed two clusters of statistical analyses using the full data of the Endocrine and Metabolic Responses on Overtraining Syndrome (EROS) study, in a total of 117 markers. We first used logistic regression to analyze five modifiable parameters (carbohydrate, protein, and overall caloric intake, sleep quality, and concurrent cognitive effort) as potential additional independent risk factors for OTS, and OTS as the outcome. We then used multivariate linear regression to analyze OTS as the independent variable and 38 dependent variables. Training patterns were found to be similar between OTS and ATL, and therefore excessive training was not a risk, and consequently not a predictor, for OTS. Each of the three dietary patterns (daily carbohydrate, daily protein, and daily overall calorie intake) were found to be the independent triggers of OTS, while sleeping, social, and training characteristics depended on other factors to induce OTS. Once triggered, OTS independently induced multiple changes, including reductions of cortisol, late growth hormone and adrenocorticotropic hormone responses to stimulations, testosterone-to-estradiol ratio, neutrophils, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, vigor levels, hydration status, and muscle mass, while increase of tension levels and visceral fat. OTS can be independently triggered by eating patterns, regardless of training patterns, while the occurrence of OTS reduced late hormonal responses and the testosterone-to-estradiol ratio, worsened mood, and affected the immunology panel. These novel findings may explain underperformance, which is the key characteristic of OTS.
-
Basal Hormones and Biochemical Markers as Predictors of Overtraining Syndrome in Male Athletes: The EROS-BASAL Study.
Journal of Athletic Training, 2019Co-Authors: Flavio A. Cadegiani, Claudio E. KaterAbstract:Context Overtraining Syndrome (OTS) and related conditions cause decreased training performance and fatigue through an imbalance among training volume, nutrition, and recovery time. No definitive b...
-
Novel insights of Overtraining Syndrome discovered from the EROS study
BMJ open sport and exercise medicine, 2019Co-Authors: Flavio A. Cadegiani, Claudio E. KaterAbstract:Background Excessive training and inadequate recovery could cause ‘Overtraining Syndrome’ (OTS), which is characterised by underperformance and fatigue. The pathophysiology of OTS is unclear. We aimed to describe novel mechanisms and risk factors associated with OTS, and thereby facilitate its early identification and prevention, from a comprehensive joint qualitative analysis of the findings from all the four arms of the Endocrine and Metabolic Responses on Overtraining Syndrome (EROS) study. Methods We compared the types and proportions of behavioural patterns of 67 evaluated parameters of OTS from 51 participants—athletes with OTS (OTS, n=14), healthy athletes (n=25) and healthy non-physically active controls (n=12). We performed overall and pairwise comparisons for statistically significant differences between the three groups (p Results A total of 44 (65.7%) markers exhibited significant differences between the three groups: 32 (72.7%) showed a loss of the conditioning effect of exercise (‘deconditioning’), 7 (15.9%) showed changes exclusive to OTS, 3 (6.8%) maintained the exercise-induced conditioning effects and 2 (4.5%) revealed an exacerbation of the adaptive changes to exercises. Conclusion Our findings suggest that OTS is likely triggered by multiple factors, not restricted to excessive training, resulted from a chronic energy deprivation, leading to multiple losses in the conditioning processes typically observed in healthy athletes, as a combination of ‘paradoxical deconditioning’ processes, which explains the gradual and marked loss of physical conditioning found in OTS. We, therefore, suggest that the term ‘paradoxical deconditioning Syndrome’ better represents the features of this Syndrome.
Flavio A. Cadegiani - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
SAT-LB4 Novel Hormonal and Metabolic Markers of Recovery From Overtraining Syndrome Unveiled by the Longitudinal ARM of the Eros Study - the Eros-Longitudinal Study
Journal of the Endocrine Society, 2020Co-Authors: Flavio A. Cadegiani, Pedro Luiz H Da Silva, Tatiana P C Abrao, Claudio E. KaterAbstract:Abstract Background: Overtraining Syndrome (OTS) is an unexplained underperformance Syndrome triggered by excessive training, insufficient caloric intake, inadequate sleep, and excessive cognitive and social demands. Investigations of markers of the challenging recovery from OTS have not been reported to date. The objective of the present study is to describe novel markers, and biochemical and clinical behaviors during the restoration process of OTS.Design: A 12-week interventional protocol in 12 athletes affected by OTS was conducted, including increased food intake, transitory interruption of the trainings, improvement of sleep quality, and management of stress.Methods: We assessed 50 parameters, including hormonal responses to an insulin tolerance test (ITT), basal hormonal and non-hormonal biochemical markers, body metabolism and composition. Results: In response to an ITT, early cortisol (p = 0.026), early GH (p = 0.004), and late GH (p = 0.037) improved significantly. Basal estradiol (p = 0.0002) and nocturnal urinary catecholamines, (p = 0.043) reduced, while testosterone (p = 0.014), testosterone:estradiol (T:E) ratio (p = 0.0005), freeT3 (p = 0.043), IGF-1 (p = 0.003), and cortisol awakening response (CAR) (p = 0.001) increased significantly. All basal parameters and early responses to ITT normalized, when compared to healthy athletes. Basal metabolic rate, fat oxidation, body fat, muscle mass, and hydration status had partial but non-significant improvements. Conclusion: After 12 weeks, athletes affected by actual OTS demonstrated substantial improvements, remarkably IGF-1, freeT3, CAR, testosterone, estradiol testosterone:estradiol ratio, CK and catecholamines, and early cortisol, early prolactin, and overall GH responses to stimulations.
-
Diagnosis of Overtraining Syndrome: Results of the Endocrine and Metabolic Responses on Overtraining Syndrome Study: EROS-DIAGNOSIS.
Open access journal of sports medicine, 2020Co-Authors: Flavio A. Cadegiani, Pedro Henrique Luiz Da Silva, Tatiana Camargo Pereira Abrao, Claudio E. KaterAbstract:Objectives Overtraining Syndrome (OTS), a common dysfunction among elite athletes, causes decreased performance and fatigue and has no standardized diagnostic criteria. The Endocrine and Metabolic Responses on Overtraining Syndrome (EROS) study identified more than 45 potential biomarkers of OTS. In the present study, we hypothesized that combinations of these biomarkers could be an accurate diagnostic tool for OTS. Methods We selected parameters with largest difference and fewest overlapping results compared to healthy athletes and highest feasibility and reproducibility. Among the multiple combinations attempted, we chose those that did not show overlapping results, according to the objective. Results We included 11 clinical parameters, 4 basal hormones, and 5 hormonal responses in Insulin Tolerance Test (ITT). The three selected diagnostic tools were the (i) EROS-CLINICAL, with only clinical parameters, which was suitable as an initial assessment for athletes suspected of OTS; (ii) EROS-SIMPLIFIED, with clinical parameters and basal hormones, when the EROS-CLINICAL was inconclusive; and (iii) EROS-COMPLETE, with basal and hormonal responses to stimulation tests, which was valuable for population-based screening, research purposes, and unusual presentations of OTS. Conclusion We identified innovative tools with 100% accuracy for the diagnosis of OTS, without the need to exclude confounding disorders.
-
Novel causes and consequences of Overtraining Syndrome: the EROS-DISRUPTORS study.
Sports Medicine Arthroscopy Rehabilitation Therapy & Technology, 2019Co-Authors: Flavio A. Cadegiani, Claudio E. KaterAbstract:Hormonal physiology in athletes, dysfunctional paths leading to Overtraining Syndrome (OTS), and clinical and biochemical behaviors that are independently modified by the presence of OTS remain unclear. Although multiple markers of OTS have recently been identified, the independent influence of OTS on hormones and metabolism have not been assessed. Hence, the objective of the present study was to uncover the previously unrecognized independent predictors of OTS and understand how OTS independently modifies the behaviors of clinical and biochemical parameters. In a total of 39 athletes (OTS-affected athletes (OTS) = 14 and healthy athletes (ATL) = 25), we performed two clusters of statistical analyses using the full data of the Endocrine and Metabolic Responses on Overtraining Syndrome (EROS) study, in a total of 117 markers. We first used logistic regression to analyze five modifiable parameters (carbohydrate, protein, and overall caloric intake, sleep quality, and concurrent cognitive effort) as potential additional independent risk factors for OTS, and OTS as the outcome. We then used multivariate linear regression to analyze OTS as the independent variable and 38 dependent variables. Training patterns were found to be similar between OTS and ATL, and therefore excessive training was not a risk, and consequently not a predictor, for OTS. Each of the three dietary patterns (daily carbohydrate, daily protein, and daily overall calorie intake) were found to be the independent triggers of OTS, while sleeping, social, and training characteristics depended on other factors to induce OTS. Once triggered, OTS independently induced multiple changes, including reductions of cortisol, late growth hormone and adrenocorticotropic hormone responses to stimulations, testosterone-to-estradiol ratio, neutrophils, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, vigor levels, hydration status, and muscle mass, while increase of tension levels and visceral fat. OTS can be independently triggered by eating patterns, regardless of training patterns, while the occurrence of OTS reduced late hormonal responses and the testosterone-to-estradiol ratio, worsened mood, and affected the immunology panel. These novel findings may explain underperformance, which is the key characteristic of OTS.
-
Basal Hormones and Biochemical Markers as Predictors of Overtraining Syndrome in Male Athletes: The EROS-BASAL Study.
Journal of Athletic Training, 2019Co-Authors: Flavio A. Cadegiani, Claudio E. KaterAbstract:Context Overtraining Syndrome (OTS) and related conditions cause decreased training performance and fatigue through an imbalance among training volume, nutrition, and recovery time. No definitive b...
-
Novel insights of Overtraining Syndrome discovered from the EROS study
BMJ open sport and exercise medicine, 2019Co-Authors: Flavio A. Cadegiani, Claudio E. KaterAbstract:Background Excessive training and inadequate recovery could cause ‘Overtraining Syndrome’ (OTS), which is characterised by underperformance and fatigue. The pathophysiology of OTS is unclear. We aimed to describe novel mechanisms and risk factors associated with OTS, and thereby facilitate its early identification and prevention, from a comprehensive joint qualitative analysis of the findings from all the four arms of the Endocrine and Metabolic Responses on Overtraining Syndrome (EROS) study. Methods We compared the types and proportions of behavioural patterns of 67 evaluated parameters of OTS from 51 participants—athletes with OTS (OTS, n=14), healthy athletes (n=25) and healthy non-physically active controls (n=12). We performed overall and pairwise comparisons for statistically significant differences between the three groups (p Results A total of 44 (65.7%) markers exhibited significant differences between the three groups: 32 (72.7%) showed a loss of the conditioning effect of exercise (‘deconditioning’), 7 (15.9%) showed changes exclusive to OTS, 3 (6.8%) maintained the exercise-induced conditioning effects and 2 (4.5%) revealed an exacerbation of the adaptive changes to exercises. Conclusion Our findings suggest that OTS is likely triggered by multiple factors, not restricted to excessive training, resulted from a chronic energy deprivation, leading to multiple losses in the conditioning processes typically observed in healthy athletes, as a combination of ‘paradoxical deconditioning’ processes, which explains the gradual and marked loss of physical conditioning found in OTS. We, therefore, suggest that the term ‘paradoxical deconditioning Syndrome’ better represents the features of this Syndrome.
Axel Urhausen - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
prevention diagnosis and treatment of the Overtraining Syndrome joint consensus statement of the european college of sport science ecss and the american college of sports medicine acsm
European Journal of Sport Science, 2013Co-Authors: Romain Meeusen, Carl Foster, Martine Duclos, Michael Gleeson, Gerard Rietjens, Jürgen M. Steinacker, David C Nieman, John S Raglin, Axel UrhausenAbstract:Successful training not only must involve overload but also must avoid the combination of excessive overload plus inadequate recovery. Athletes can experience short-term performance decrement without severe psychological or lasting other negative symptoms. This functional overreaching will eventually lead to an improvement in performance after recovery. When athletes do not sufficiently respect the balance between training and recovery, nonfunctional overreaching (NFOR) can occur. The distinction between NFOR and Overtraining Syndrome (OTS) is very difficult and will depend on the clinical outcome and exclusion diagnosis. The athlete will often show the same clinical, hormonal, and other signs and symptoms. A keyword in the recognition of OTS might be ‘‘prolonged maladaptation’’ not only of the athlete but also of several biological, neurochemical, and hormonal regulation mechanisms. It is generally thought that symptoms of OTS, such as fatigue, performance decline, and mood disturbances, are more severe than those of NFOR. However, there is no scientific evidence to either confirm or refute this suggestion. One approach to understanding the etiology of OTS involves the exclusion of organic diseases or infections and factors such as dietary caloric restriction (negative energy balance) and insufficient carbohydrate and/or protein intake, iron deficiency, magnesium deficiency, allergies, and others together with identification of initiating events or triggers. In this article, we provide the recent status of possible markers for the detection of OTS. Currently, several markers (hormones, performance tests, psychological tests, and biochemical and immune markers) are used, but none of them meet all the criteria to make their use generally accepted. Key Words: Overtraining Syndrome, OVERREACHING, TRAINING, PERFORMANCE, UNDERPERFORMANCE
-
prevention diagnosis and treatment of the Overtraining Syndrome joint consensus statement of the european college of sport science and the american college of sports medicine
Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 2013Co-Authors: Romain Meeusen, Carl Foster, Martine Duclos, Michael Gleeson, Gerard Rietjens, Jürgen M. Steinacker, David C Nieman, John S Raglin, Axel UrhausenAbstract:Successful training not only must involve overload but also must avoid the combination of excessive overload plus inadequate recovery. Athletes can experience short-term performance decrement without severe psychological or lasting other negative symptoms. This functional overreaching will eventually lead to an improvement in performance after recovery. When athletes do not sufficiently respect the balance between training and recovery, nonfunctional overreaching (NFOR) can occur. The distinction between NFOR and Overtraining Syndrome (OTS) is very difficult and will depend on the clinical outcome and exclusion diagnosis. The athlete will often show the same clinical, hormonal, and other signs and symptoms. A keyword in the recognition of OTS might be "prolonged maladaptation" not only of the athlete but also of several biological, neurochemical, and hormonal regulation mechanisms. It is generally thought that symptoms of OTS, such as fatigue, performance decline, and mood disturbances, are more severe than those of NFOR. However, there is no scientific evidence to either confirm or refute this suggestion. One approach to understanding the etiology of OTS involves the exclusion of organic diseases or infections and factors such as dietary caloric restriction (negative energy balance) and insufficient carbohydrate and/or protein intake, iron deficiency, magnesium deficiency, allergies, and others together with identification of initiating events or triggers. In this article, we provide the recent status of possible markers for the detection of OTS. Currently, several markers (hormones, performance tests, psychological tests, and biochemical and immune markers) are used, but none of them meet all the criteria to make their use generally accepted.
-
Prevention, diagnosis and treatment of the Overtraining Syndrome: Joint consensus statement of the European College of Sport Science (ECSS) and the American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM)
European Journal of Sport Science, 2013Co-Authors: Romain Meeusen, Carl Foster, Martine Duclos, Michael Gleeson, Gerard Rietjens, Jürgen M. Steinacker, David C Nieman, John S Raglin, Andrew Fry, Axel UrhausenAbstract:Successful training must involve overload, but also must avoid the combination of excessive overload plus inadequate recovery. Athletes can experience short-term performance decrement, without severe psychological, or lasting other negative symptoms. This Functional Overreaching (FOR) will eventually lead to an improvement in performance after recovery. When athletes do not sufficiently respect the balance between training and recovery, Non-Functional Overreaching (NFOR) can occur. The distinction between NFOR and the Overtraining Syndrome (OTS) is very difficult and will depend on the clinical outcome and exclusion diagnosis. The athlete will often show the same clinical, hormonal and other signs and symptoms. A keyword in the recognition of OTS might be prolonged maladaptation not only of the athlete, but also of several biological, neurochemical, and hormonal regulation mechanisms. It is generally thought that symptoms of OTS, such as fatigue, performance decline and mood disturbances, are more severe than those of NFOR. However, there is no scientific evidence to either confirmor refute this suggestion. One approach to understanding the aetiology of OTS involves the exclusion of organic diseases or infections and factors such as dietary caloric restriction (negative energy balance) and insufficient carbohydrate and/or protein intake, iron deficiency, magnesium deficiency, allergies, etc., together with identification of initiating events or triggers. In this paper, we provide the recent status of possible markers for the detection of OTS. Currently several markers (hormones, performance tests, psychological tests, biochemical and immune markers) are used, but none of them meets all criteria to make its use generally accepted.
-
Prevention, diagnosis and treatment of the Overtraining Syndrome: ECSS Position Statement ‘Task Force’
European Journal of Sport Science, 2006Co-Authors: Romain Meeusen, Martine Duclos, Michael Gleeson, Gerard Rietjens, Jürgen M. Steinacker, Axel UrhausenAbstract:Abstract Successful training must involve overload but also must avoid the combination of excessive overload plus inadequate recovery. Athletes can experience short term performance decrement, without severe psychological, or lasting other negative symptoms. This Functional Overreaching (FOR) will eventually lead to an improvement in performance after recovery. When athletes do not sufficiently respect the balance between training and recovery, Non-Functional Overreaching (NFOR) can occur. The distinction between NFOR and the Overtraining Syndrome (OTS) is very difficult and will depend on the clinical outcome and exclusion diagnosis. The athlete will often show the same clinical, hormonal and other signs and symptoms. A keyword in the recognition of OTS might be ‘prolonged maladaptation’ not only of the athlete, but also of several biological, neurochemical, and hormonal regulation mechanisms. It is generally thought that symptoms of OTS, such as fatigue, performance decline, and mood disturbances, are m...
-
Blood Hormones as Markers of Training Stress and Overtraining
Sports Medicine, 1995Co-Authors: Axel Urhausen, Holger H. W. Gabriel, Wilfried KindermannAbstract:An imbalance between the overall strain experienced during exercise training and the athlete’s tolerance of such effort may induce overreaching or Overtraining Syndrome. Overtraining Syndrome is characterised by diminished sport-specific physical performance, accelerated fatiguability and subjective symptoms of stress. Overtraining is feared by athletes yet there is a lack of objective parameters suitable for its diagnosis and prevention.
Romain Meeusen - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Improving the Diagnosis of Nonfunctional Overreaching and Overtraining Syndrome.
Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 2019Co-Authors: Luk Buyse, Lieselot Decroix, Niels Timmermans, Kurt Barbé, Ruth Verrelst, Romain MeeusenAbstract:ABSTRACTIntroductionThis study aimed to simplify and optimize the distinction between non – functional overreaching (NFO) and Overtraining Syndrome (OTS) by developing a multivariate approach (discriminant analysis, DA) including hormonal and psychological changes measured during the Training Optimi
-
The Overtraining Syndrome in Soldiers: Insights from the Sports Domain.
Military Medicine, 2018Co-Authors: Susan Vrijkotte, Bart Roelands, Nathalie Pattyn, Romain MeeusenAbstract:INTRODUCTION Soldiers are exposed to extreme training regimens in order to optimally prepare for real battle. High attrition rates are a known issue during training courses, especially for elite troops. An underlying factor might be the disbalance between stress/strain and recovery. The aim of this review is to give insight in the current knowledge about functional overreaching (FOR), non-FOR (NFOR), and the Overtraining Syndrome (OTS) in the military. MATERIALS AND METHODS A systematic literature review was conducted. PubMed, IngentaConnect, Science Direct, and Web of Science were screened for the following keywords and combinations of search terms; military, personnel, OT, soldier. RESULTS Seven studies investigating the effects of OT during training courses were selected. The definitions used for OT varied widely and there is no systematic use of markers to determine FOR, NFOR, or the OTS in the military. CONCLUSIONS Much research on NFOR/OTS has been conducted in the sports domain and the military could make use of these insights to promote a more efficient balance between training load and recovery. It is suggested to regularly test soldiers on physical performance, psychomotor speed and mood using ideally a military-specific test or the 1.5-mile run, psychomotor vigilance test and Profile of Mood States. The two-bout exercise test can be used as a specific test if previous testing indicates the development of NFOR/OTS and can be combined with metabolic and immunological testing to exclude pathological causes.
-
prevention diagnosis and treatment of the Overtraining Syndrome joint consensus statement of the european college of sport science ecss and the american college of sports medicine acsm
European Journal of Sport Science, 2013Co-Authors: Romain Meeusen, Carl Foster, Martine Duclos, Michael Gleeson, Gerard Rietjens, Jürgen M. Steinacker, David C Nieman, John S Raglin, Axel UrhausenAbstract:Successful training not only must involve overload but also must avoid the combination of excessive overload plus inadequate recovery. Athletes can experience short-term performance decrement without severe psychological or lasting other negative symptoms. This functional overreaching will eventually lead to an improvement in performance after recovery. When athletes do not sufficiently respect the balance between training and recovery, nonfunctional overreaching (NFOR) can occur. The distinction between NFOR and Overtraining Syndrome (OTS) is very difficult and will depend on the clinical outcome and exclusion diagnosis. The athlete will often show the same clinical, hormonal, and other signs and symptoms. A keyword in the recognition of OTS might be ‘‘prolonged maladaptation’’ not only of the athlete but also of several biological, neurochemical, and hormonal regulation mechanisms. It is generally thought that symptoms of OTS, such as fatigue, performance decline, and mood disturbances, are more severe than those of NFOR. However, there is no scientific evidence to either confirm or refute this suggestion. One approach to understanding the etiology of OTS involves the exclusion of organic diseases or infections and factors such as dietary caloric restriction (negative energy balance) and insufficient carbohydrate and/or protein intake, iron deficiency, magnesium deficiency, allergies, and others together with identification of initiating events or triggers. In this article, we provide the recent status of possible markers for the detection of OTS. Currently, several markers (hormones, performance tests, psychological tests, and biochemical and immune markers) are used, but none of them meet all the criteria to make their use generally accepted. Key Words: Overtraining Syndrome, OVERREACHING, TRAINING, PERFORMANCE, UNDERPERFORMANCE
-
prevention diagnosis and treatment of the Overtraining Syndrome joint consensus statement of the european college of sport science and the american college of sports medicine
Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 2013Co-Authors: Romain Meeusen, Carl Foster, Martine Duclos, Michael Gleeson, Gerard Rietjens, Jürgen M. Steinacker, David C Nieman, John S Raglin, Axel UrhausenAbstract:Successful training not only must involve overload but also must avoid the combination of excessive overload plus inadequate recovery. Athletes can experience short-term performance decrement without severe psychological or lasting other negative symptoms. This functional overreaching will eventually lead to an improvement in performance after recovery. When athletes do not sufficiently respect the balance between training and recovery, nonfunctional overreaching (NFOR) can occur. The distinction between NFOR and Overtraining Syndrome (OTS) is very difficult and will depend on the clinical outcome and exclusion diagnosis. The athlete will often show the same clinical, hormonal, and other signs and symptoms. A keyword in the recognition of OTS might be "prolonged maladaptation" not only of the athlete but also of several biological, neurochemical, and hormonal regulation mechanisms. It is generally thought that symptoms of OTS, such as fatigue, performance decline, and mood disturbances, are more severe than those of NFOR. However, there is no scientific evidence to either confirm or refute this suggestion. One approach to understanding the etiology of OTS involves the exclusion of organic diseases or infections and factors such as dietary caloric restriction (negative energy balance) and insufficient carbohydrate and/or protein intake, iron deficiency, magnesium deficiency, allergies, and others together with identification of initiating events or triggers. In this article, we provide the recent status of possible markers for the detection of OTS. Currently, several markers (hormones, performance tests, psychological tests, and biochemical and immune markers) are used, but none of them meet all the criteria to make their use generally accepted.
-
Prevention, diagnosis and treatment of the Overtraining Syndrome: Joint consensus statement of the European College of Sport Science (ECSS) and the American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM)
European Journal of Sport Science, 2013Co-Authors: Romain Meeusen, Carl Foster, Martine Duclos, Michael Gleeson, Gerard Rietjens, Jürgen M. Steinacker, David C Nieman, John S Raglin, Andrew Fry, Axel UrhausenAbstract:Successful training must involve overload, but also must avoid the combination of excessive overload plus inadequate recovery. Athletes can experience short-term performance decrement, without severe psychological, or lasting other negative symptoms. This Functional Overreaching (FOR) will eventually lead to an improvement in performance after recovery. When athletes do not sufficiently respect the balance between training and recovery, Non-Functional Overreaching (NFOR) can occur. The distinction between NFOR and the Overtraining Syndrome (OTS) is very difficult and will depend on the clinical outcome and exclusion diagnosis. The athlete will often show the same clinical, hormonal and other signs and symptoms. A keyword in the recognition of OTS might be prolonged maladaptation not only of the athlete, but also of several biological, neurochemical, and hormonal regulation mechanisms. It is generally thought that symptoms of OTS, such as fatigue, performance decline and mood disturbances, are more severe than those of NFOR. However, there is no scientific evidence to either confirmor refute this suggestion. One approach to understanding the aetiology of OTS involves the exclusion of organic diseases or infections and factors such as dietary caloric restriction (negative energy balance) and insufficient carbohydrate and/or protein intake, iron deficiency, magnesium deficiency, allergies, etc., together with identification of initiating events or triggers. In this paper, we provide the recent status of possible markers for the detection of OTS. Currently several markers (hormones, performance tests, psychological tests, biochemical and immune markers) are used, but none of them meets all criteria to make its use generally accepted.
Carl Foster - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
prevention diagnosis and treatment of the Overtraining Syndrome joint consensus statement of the european college of sport science ecss and the american college of sports medicine acsm
European Journal of Sport Science, 2013Co-Authors: Romain Meeusen, Carl Foster, Martine Duclos, Michael Gleeson, Gerard Rietjens, Jürgen M. Steinacker, David C Nieman, John S Raglin, Axel UrhausenAbstract:Successful training not only must involve overload but also must avoid the combination of excessive overload plus inadequate recovery. Athletes can experience short-term performance decrement without severe psychological or lasting other negative symptoms. This functional overreaching will eventually lead to an improvement in performance after recovery. When athletes do not sufficiently respect the balance between training and recovery, nonfunctional overreaching (NFOR) can occur. The distinction between NFOR and Overtraining Syndrome (OTS) is very difficult and will depend on the clinical outcome and exclusion diagnosis. The athlete will often show the same clinical, hormonal, and other signs and symptoms. A keyword in the recognition of OTS might be ‘‘prolonged maladaptation’’ not only of the athlete but also of several biological, neurochemical, and hormonal regulation mechanisms. It is generally thought that symptoms of OTS, such as fatigue, performance decline, and mood disturbances, are more severe than those of NFOR. However, there is no scientific evidence to either confirm or refute this suggestion. One approach to understanding the etiology of OTS involves the exclusion of organic diseases or infections and factors such as dietary caloric restriction (negative energy balance) and insufficient carbohydrate and/or protein intake, iron deficiency, magnesium deficiency, allergies, and others together with identification of initiating events or triggers. In this article, we provide the recent status of possible markers for the detection of OTS. Currently, several markers (hormones, performance tests, psychological tests, and biochemical and immune markers) are used, but none of them meet all the criteria to make their use generally accepted. Key Words: Overtraining Syndrome, OVERREACHING, TRAINING, PERFORMANCE, UNDERPERFORMANCE
-
prevention diagnosis and treatment of the Overtraining Syndrome joint consensus statement of the european college of sport science and the american college of sports medicine
Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 2013Co-Authors: Romain Meeusen, Carl Foster, Martine Duclos, Michael Gleeson, Gerard Rietjens, Jürgen M. Steinacker, David C Nieman, John S Raglin, Axel UrhausenAbstract:Successful training not only must involve overload but also must avoid the combination of excessive overload plus inadequate recovery. Athletes can experience short-term performance decrement without severe psychological or lasting other negative symptoms. This functional overreaching will eventually lead to an improvement in performance after recovery. When athletes do not sufficiently respect the balance between training and recovery, nonfunctional overreaching (NFOR) can occur. The distinction between NFOR and Overtraining Syndrome (OTS) is very difficult and will depend on the clinical outcome and exclusion diagnosis. The athlete will often show the same clinical, hormonal, and other signs and symptoms. A keyword in the recognition of OTS might be "prolonged maladaptation" not only of the athlete but also of several biological, neurochemical, and hormonal regulation mechanisms. It is generally thought that symptoms of OTS, such as fatigue, performance decline, and mood disturbances, are more severe than those of NFOR. However, there is no scientific evidence to either confirm or refute this suggestion. One approach to understanding the etiology of OTS involves the exclusion of organic diseases or infections and factors such as dietary caloric restriction (negative energy balance) and insufficient carbohydrate and/or protein intake, iron deficiency, magnesium deficiency, allergies, and others together with identification of initiating events or triggers. In this article, we provide the recent status of possible markers for the detection of OTS. Currently, several markers (hormones, performance tests, psychological tests, and biochemical and immune markers) are used, but none of them meet all the criteria to make their use generally accepted.
-
Prevention, diagnosis and treatment of the Overtraining Syndrome: Joint consensus statement of the European College of Sport Science (ECSS) and the American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM)
European Journal of Sport Science, 2013Co-Authors: Romain Meeusen, Carl Foster, Martine Duclos, Michael Gleeson, Gerard Rietjens, Jürgen M. Steinacker, David C Nieman, John S Raglin, Andrew Fry, Axel UrhausenAbstract:Successful training must involve overload, but also must avoid the combination of excessive overload plus inadequate recovery. Athletes can experience short-term performance decrement, without severe psychological, or lasting other negative symptoms. This Functional Overreaching (FOR) will eventually lead to an improvement in performance after recovery. When athletes do not sufficiently respect the balance between training and recovery, Non-Functional Overreaching (NFOR) can occur. The distinction between NFOR and the Overtraining Syndrome (OTS) is very difficult and will depend on the clinical outcome and exclusion diagnosis. The athlete will often show the same clinical, hormonal and other signs and symptoms. A keyword in the recognition of OTS might be prolonged maladaptation not only of the athlete, but also of several biological, neurochemical, and hormonal regulation mechanisms. It is generally thought that symptoms of OTS, such as fatigue, performance decline and mood disturbances, are more severe than those of NFOR. However, there is no scientific evidence to either confirmor refute this suggestion. One approach to understanding the aetiology of OTS involves the exclusion of organic diseases or infections and factors such as dietary caloric restriction (negative energy balance) and insufficient carbohydrate and/or protein intake, iron deficiency, magnesium deficiency, allergies, etc., together with identification of initiating events or triggers. In this paper, we provide the recent status of possible markers for the detection of OTS. Currently several markers (hormones, performance tests, psychological tests, biochemical and immune markers) are used, but none of them meets all criteria to make its use generally accepted.
-
Definition, Types, Symptoms, Findings, Underlying Mechanisms, and Frequency of Overtraining and Overtraining Syndrome
Overload Performance Incompetence and Regeneration in Sport, 1999Co-Authors: Manfred Lehmann, Carl Foster, U. Gastmann, Hans Keizer, Jiirgen M. SteinackerAbstract:From an operational standpoint, Overtraining can be defined as stress > recovery (regeneration) imbalance, that is, too much stress combined with too little time for regeneration –In this context, stress summarizes all individual training, non-training, and competition-dependent stress factors,–Particularly, additional exogenous non-training stress factors, such as social, educational, occupational, economic, nutritional factors, travel, and endogenous factors (genetic predisposition) exacerbate the risk of a resulting Overtraining Syndrome in a completely individual manner .The term Overtraining Syndrome describes an impaired state of health which is caused by Overtraining and characterized by particular findings.
-
MONITORING OF TRAINING, WARM UP, AND PERFORMANCE IN ATHLETES
Overload Performance Incompetence and Regeneration in Sport, 1999Co-Authors: Carl Foster, Ann C. Snyder, R. WelshAbstract:Overtraining Syndrome is a serious disorder, equivalent in severity to many orthopaedic injuries, and often sufficient to end a competitive season. Although various therapeutic approaches have been tried, Overtraining Syndrome is generally refractory to treatments other than an extended rest from heavy training and competition. Accordingly, prevention of Overtraining Syndrome is of critical importance. Although widely studied, the ultimate causes and pathophysiologic nature of Overtraining Syndrome are not fully understood .There is a general understanding of the factors likely to cause Overtraining Syndrome relative to the structure of the training program, with large increases in training load, training monotony, travel, frequent competition and social factors all thought to increase the liklihood of developing Overtraining Syndrome. Despite extensive study, the diagnosis of Overtraining Syndrome still remains a diagnosis by exclusion of other pathophysiologic abnormalities. Further, even with extensive laboratory facilities available, there are no universally agreed upon markers which signal the impending development of Overtraining Syndrome. Beyond this, the length of time involved in the analysis of complex hematological or hormone variables creates a feedback loop which is too long to be of significant practical value to coaches and athletes. Certainly, at the present time, there are no simple indicators of impending Overtraining Syndrome that are available to coaches and athletes. Given the nearly universal tendency for coaches and athletes to respond inappropriately to temporary training or competitive incompetence by doing more training, simple markers which might signal impending Overtraining, or at least deteriorating overreaching, would be most useful.
