The relationship between recovery and fatigue and its impact on performance has attracted the interest of sport science for many years. An adequate balance between stress (training and competition load, other life demands) and recovery is essential for athletes to achieve continuous high-level performance. Research has focused on the examination of physiological and psychological recovery strategies to compensate external and internal training and competition loads. A systematic monitoring of recovery and the subsequent implementation of recovery routines aims at maximizing performance and preventing negative developments such as underrecovery, nonfunctional overreaching, the overtraining syndrome, injuries, or illnesses. Due to the inter- and intraindividual variability of responses to training, competition, and recovery strategies, a diverse set of expertise is required to address the multifaceted phenomena of recovery, performance, and their interactions to transfer knowledge from sport science to sport practice. For this purpose, a symposium on Recovery and Performance was organized at the Technical University Munich Science and Study Center Raitenhaslach (Germany) in September 2016. Various international experts from many disciplines and research areas gathered to discuss and share their knowledge of recovery for performance enhancement in a variety of settings. The results of this meeting are outlined in this consensus statement that provides central definitions, theoretical frameworks, and practical implications as a synopsis of the current knowledge of recovery and performance. While our understanding of the complex relationship between recovery and performance has significantly increased through research, some important issues for future investigations are also elaborated.

Monitoring of recovery in the context of athletic performance has gained significant importance during recent years. As a systematic process of data collection and evaluation, the monitoring of recovery can be implemented for various purposes. It may aid to prevent negative outcomes of training or competition, such as underrecovery, overtraining, or injuries. Further, it aims at establishing routines and strategies necessary to guarantee athletes' readiness for performance by restoring their depleted resources. Comprehensive monitoring of recovery ideally encompasses a multidimensional approach, thereby considering biological, psychological, and social monitoring methods. From a biological perspective, physiological (e.g., cardiac parameters), biochemical (e.g., creatine kinase), hormonal (e.g., salivary cortisol) and immunological (e.g., immunoglobulin A) markers can be taken into account to operationalize training loads and recovery needs. Psychological approaches suggest the application of validated and reliable psychometric questionnaires (e.g., Recovery-Stress Questionnaire for Athletes) to measure a subjective perception of recovery as well as the subjective degree of training- or competition-induced fatigue. Social aspects also play a role in performance monitoring and may hence provide essential performance-related information. The implementation of a monitoring routine within athletic environments represents a continuous process which functions as an effective addition to training and depends on a range of conditions (e.g., organizational regulations, commitment of athletes). Current research in the field of monitoring aims at establishing individualized monitoring regimes that are referring to intraindividual reference values with the help of innovative technological devices.

Please cite this article as: Heidari, J., Mierswa, T., Kleinert, J., Ott, I., Levenig, C., Hasenbring, M., Kellmann, M., Parameters of low back pain chronicity among athletes: Associations with physical and mental stress,

Back pain (BP), a prominent problem for competitive athletes, is a primary reason for limitations in athletic performance and daily life restrictions. As studies on the relationship between psychological variables and BP in athletes are scarce, the aim of this study was to investigate stress and depression in competitive athletes with BP. In a cross-sectional design, data of 154 competitive athletes (51% female; M= 18.81 years, SD= 5.05 years) were collected, assessing Performance stress, Socio-emotional stress, Risk for depression and Psychological well-being and the two BP parameters BP Intensity and Disability. Two multiple linear regressions were conducted to predict (1) BP Intensity and (2) Disability from Performance stress, Socio-emotional stress, Risk for depression and Psychological well-being. Multiple linear regressions demonstrated that Performance stress (β = .21, p = .01) was the only significant predictor of BP Intensity (F= 6.68, p = .01, R = .05), whilst Risk for depression (β = .24, p = .01) was the only significant predictor of Disability (F= 8.46, p = .01, R = .06). Neither gender nor age explained a significant amount of variance in the models. Study results showed that, as in the general population, the variables stress and depression are related to BP in competitive athletes. In particular, BP intensity was found to be associated with stress and BP-related disability was associated with depression, whereas age and gender showed no association with the BP parameters. A longitudinal investigation is warranted to determine the direction of the observed relationships.

No abstract