Symptoms of Overtraining in Resistance Exercise: International Cross-Sectional Survey

Abstract

Purpose: To provide details on the nature and symptomatic profile of training maladaptation in competitive resistance-based athletes to examine whether there are symptoms that may be used as prognostic indicators of overtraining. Identifying prognostic tools to assess for training maladaptation is essential for avoiding severe overtraining conditions. Methods: A Web-based survey was distributed to a cross-sectional convenience sample of competitive athletes involved in sports with a significant resistance-training component. The 46-item anonymous survey was distributed via industry experts and social media from July to August 2019. Results: The final sample included 605 responses (completion rate: 84%). About 71% of the respondents indicated that they had previously experienced an unexplained decrease in performance. Among those, the majority reported a performance decrement lasting 1 wk to 1 mo (43.8%). General feelings of fatigue were the most frequent self-reported symptom of maladaptation. Acute training maladaptation, lasting <1 mo, was also accompanied by symptoms of musculoskeletal aches and pain. In the majority of cases (92.5%), training maladaptation was accompanied by additional nontraining stressors. A greater proportion of the respondents with more severe maladaptation (>4 mo) were training to muscle failure. Conclusion: The results from this study support the multifactorial nature of training maladaptation. The multidimensional nature of fatigue and individual variability in symptomatic responses precludes definitive prognostic symptoms or differential diagnostic factors of functional/nonfunctional overreaching or the overtraining syndrome in resistance exercise.

“Is It Overtraining or Just Work Ethic?”: Coaches’ Perceptions of Overtraining in High-Performance Strength Sports

“…The primary research question originated as part of a wider investigation into strength sports as part of a Philosophy Doctorate and aimed to investigate the complex topic of OT/OTS from the perspective of the strength sport coach; an area of applied research that has not yet been explored to date, and as such, lacks qualitative analysis. Improved communication between laboratory research and applied experience is key for the development of optimal coaching practices, particularly in underinvestigated areas such as OT/OTS where the existing literature suggests dichotomy between experimental research and the application of such evidence in the training environment [10,[12][13][14][15]. The principal investigator has practical experience and a research interest in strength sports, and, as such, understands the importance of advancing knowledge by bridging the gap between research and practice.…”

“…In this case, it is the time-course to recovery from impaired performance that provides the distinction between NFOR and OTS; NFOR requires weeks to months of performance restoration, whilst OTS can require several months [10,16,31]. Previous research has accepted that a lack of consistent terminology and definitions is a major concern for understanding the aetiology of OTS, and that a lack of consistency might hinder both the ability to compare results of research studies and apply such findings in practice [11,15,16]. This is illustrated in the literature by the use of the term overtraining when referring to both the prescription of a short-term resistance training protocol where no incidence of OTS was reported [32], and also to describe training protocols purposely designed to induce OTS [33].…”

“…Evidence for the identification, diagnosis, and prevalence of OTS in strength sports or resistance training is limited [6,[11][12][13][14]. Whilst more than 70% of strength sport competitors have reported unexplained decreases in performance, approximately 43% of those have indicated a range of symptoms lasting one week to one month, with 13.1% lasting one to three months and only 4.7% > 4 months [15], suggesting higher occurrence of acute fatigue or OR, and lower incidence of OTS.…”

“…A lack of individualised testing protocols and gold standard markers combined with multidimensional and individual symptoms make the identification of OTS difficult [10,15]. As such, there are a lack of reliable, prognostic tools for sport coaches to accurately judge when periods of increased training will lead to performance supercompensation or result in NFOR/OTS.…”

“…It is important to improve communication between laboratory research and applied experience in order to develop robust and practical coaching tools, particularly in underinvestigated area such as OR/OTS, and where the existing literature suggests inconsistency between expert statements, experimental study findings and the application of such evidence to the training environment [10,[12][13][14][15]. To our knowledge, there has been no previous qualitative research undertaken to capture high-performance strength sport coaches' perceptions of long-term performance decline and their experiences of OTS.…”