Individualized Endurance Training Based on Recovery and Training Status in Recreational Runners

Abstract

Purpose: Longterm development of endurance performance requires a proper balance between strain and recovery. Because responses and adaptations to training are highly individual, this study examined whether individually adjusted endurance training based on recovery and training status would lead to greater adaptations compared with a predefined program. Methods: Recreational runners were divided into predefined (PD; n = 14) or individualized (IND; n = 16) training groups.In IND, the training load was decreased, maintained, or increased twice a week based on nocturnal heart rate variability, perceived recovery, and heart rate-running speed index. Both groups performed 3-wk preparatory, 6-wk volume, and 6-wk interval periods. Incremental treadmill tests and 10-km running tests were performed before the preparatory period (T 0 ) and after the preparatory (T 1 ), volume (T 2 ), and interval (T 3 ) periods. The magnitude of training adaptations was defined based on the coefficient of variation between T 0 and T 1 tests (high >2Â, low <0.5Â). Results: Both groups improved (P < 0.01) their maximal treadmill speed and 10-km time from T 1 to T 3 . The change in the 10-km time was greater in IND compared with PD (−6.2% ± 2.8% vs −2.9% ± 2.4%, P = 0.002). In addition, IND had more high responders (50% vs 29%) and fewer low responders (0% vs 21%) compared with PD in the change of maximal treadmill speed and 10-km performance (81% vs 23% and 13% vs 23%), respectively. Conclusions: PD and IND induced positive training adaptations, but the individualized training seemed more beneficial in endurance performance. Moreover, IND increased the likelihood of high response and decreased the occurrence of low response to endurance training.

Predicting Running Performance and Adaptations from Intervals at Maximal Sustainable Effort

“…Data for the studies were extracted from intervention studies [16,17] that used same kind of 6x3-min interval sessions and executed either a 3-km track running test or a 10-km road running test as a performance outcome test before and after the interval training period. The timing (T1 and T2) of the 6x3-min interval sessions and test runs with respect to the training interventions are presented in Figure 1.…”

“…The study consisted of two separate datasets that were collected during previous intervention studies [16,17]. In both datasets, par ticipants were recreationally endurancetrained male and female runners (▶table 1).…”

“…Time, average running speed, av erage HR, and peak HR were analyzed from all tests. Incremental treadmill protocol is presented in more detail elsewhere [16,17]. Parameters that were used in the current analyses involved HRpeak, submaximal VO 2 at 10 km/h, VO 2max , speed at the first (vLT1) and the second (vLT2) lactate thresholds and peak speed (vPeak) dur ing the test.…”

Measuring objective fatigability and autonomic dysfunction in clinical populations: How and why?

“…In this manuscript, we will focus on two particular factors: (i) a deteriorated resistance to objective fatigability (17) and (ii) the dysfunction of the autonomic nervous system (ANS) that plays a major role in cardiac and vascular adaptations to environmental stress (18). Autonomic functions may be useful as objective physiological markers for chronic fatigue because autonomic dysfunction can accentuate the pejorative prognostic of the disease (19). Assessing autonomic dysfunction in patients with fatigue aids targeting therapeutic interventions, in particular the development of management strategies by helping to tailor the amount of physical activity, as performed in athletes (20).…”

“…Autonomic functions may be useful as objective physiological markers for chronic fatigue because autonomic dysfunction can accentuate the pejorative prognostic of the disease ( 19 ). Assessing autonomic dysfunction in patients with fatigue aids targeting therapeutic interventions, in particular the development of management strategies by helping to tailor the amount of physical activity, as performed in athletes ( 20 ). Although objective fatigability and ANS may not be connected, they are both objective measures that can be associated with fatigue, explaining why they are associated in the present manuscript.…”