Changes in choice reaction time during and after 8 days exhaustive cycling are not related to changes in physical performance

Twan ten Haaf, Selma Van Staveren, Danilo Iannetta, Bart Roelands, Romain Meeusen, Maria F. Piacentini, Carl Foster, Leo Koenderman, Hein A.M. Daanen, Jos J. De Koning

Research output: Contribution to JournalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

Purpose: Reaction time has been proposed as a training monitoring tool, but to date, results are equivocal. Therefore, it was investigated whether reaction time can be used as a monitoring tool to establish overreaching. Methods: The study included 30 subjects (11 females and 19 males, age: 40.8 [10.8] years, VO2max: 51.8 [6.3] mL/kg/min) who participated in an 8-day cycling event. The external exercise load increased approximately 900% compared with the preparation period. Performance was measured before and after the event using a maximal incremental cycling test. Subjects with decreased performance after the event were classified as functionally overreached (FOR) and others as acutely fatigued (AF). A choice reaction time test was performed 2 weeks before (pre), 1 week after (post), and 5 weeks after (follow-up), as well as at the start and end of the event. Results: A total of 14 subjects were classified as AF and 14 as FOR (2 subjects were excluded). During the event, reaction time at the end was 68 ms (95% confidence interval, 46-89) faster than at the start. Reaction time post event was 41 ms (95% confidence interval, 12-71) faster than pre event and follow-up was 55 ms faster (95% confidence interval, 26-83). The time by class interaction was not significant during (P = .26) and after (P = .43) the event. Correlations between physical performance and reaction time were not significant (all Ps < .30). Conclusions: No differences in choice reaction time between AF and FOR subjects were observed. It is suggested that choice reaction time is not valid for early detection of overreaching in the field.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)428-433
Number of pages6
JournalInternational Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance
Volume13
Issue number4
Early online dateAug 2017
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Apr 2018

Fingerprint

Confidence Intervals
aliflurane

Keywords

  • Cognitive performance
  • Overreaching
  • Overtraining
  • Training monitoring

Cite this

@article{441d123ca9a642179388390808aa4c35,
title = "Changes in choice reaction time during and after 8 days exhaustive cycling are not related to changes in physical performance",
abstract = "Purpose: Reaction time has been proposed as a training monitoring tool, but to date, results are equivocal. Therefore, it was investigated whether reaction time can be used as a monitoring tool to establish overreaching. Methods: The study included 30 subjects (11 females and 19 males, age: 40.8 [10.8] years, VO2max: 51.8 [6.3] mL/kg/min) who participated in an 8-day cycling event. The external exercise load increased approximately 900{\%} compared with the preparation period. Performance was measured before and after the event using a maximal incremental cycling test. Subjects with decreased performance after the event were classified as functionally overreached (FOR) and others as acutely fatigued (AF). A choice reaction time test was performed 2 weeks before (pre), 1 week after (post), and 5 weeks after (follow-up), as well as at the start and end of the event. Results: A total of 14 subjects were classified as AF and 14 as FOR (2 subjects were excluded). During the event, reaction time at the end was 68 ms (95{\%} confidence interval, 46-89) faster than at the start. Reaction time post event was 41 ms (95{\%} confidence interval, 12-71) faster than pre event and follow-up was 55 ms faster (95{\%} confidence interval, 26-83). The time by class interaction was not significant during (P = .26) and after (P = .43) the event. Correlations between physical performance and reaction time were not significant (all Ps < .30). Conclusions: No differences in choice reaction time between AF and FOR subjects were observed. It is suggested that choice reaction time is not valid for early detection of overreaching in the field.",
keywords = "Cognitive performance, Overreaching, Overtraining, Training monitoring",
author = "{ten Haaf}, Twan and {Van Staveren}, Selma and Danilo Iannetta and Bart Roelands and Romain Meeusen and Piacentini, {Maria F.} and Carl Foster and Leo Koenderman and Daanen, {Hein A.M.} and {De Koning}, {Jos J.}",
year = "2018",
month = "4",
doi = "10.1123/ijspp.2017-0218",
language = "English",
volume = "13",
pages = "428--433",
journal = "International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance",
issn = "1555-0265",
publisher = "Human Kinetics Publishers Inc.",
number = "4",

}

Changes in choice reaction time during and after 8 days exhaustive cycling are not related to changes in physical performance. / ten Haaf, Twan; Van Staveren, Selma; Iannetta, Danilo; Roelands, Bart; Meeusen, Romain; Piacentini, Maria F.; Foster, Carl; Koenderman, Leo; Daanen, Hein A.M.; De Koning, Jos J.

In: International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance, Vol. 13, No. 4, 04.2018, p. 428-433.

Research output: Contribution to JournalArticleAcademicpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Changes in choice reaction time during and after 8 days exhaustive cycling are not related to changes in physical performance

AU - ten Haaf, Twan

AU - Van Staveren, Selma

AU - Iannetta, Danilo

AU - Roelands, Bart

AU - Meeusen, Romain

AU - Piacentini, Maria F.

AU - Foster, Carl

AU - Koenderman, Leo

AU - Daanen, Hein A.M.

AU - De Koning, Jos J.

PY - 2018/4

Y1 - 2018/4

N2 - Purpose: Reaction time has been proposed as a training monitoring tool, but to date, results are equivocal. Therefore, it was investigated whether reaction time can be used as a monitoring tool to establish overreaching. Methods: The study included 30 subjects (11 females and 19 males, age: 40.8 [10.8] years, VO2max: 51.8 [6.3] mL/kg/min) who participated in an 8-day cycling event. The external exercise load increased approximately 900% compared with the preparation period. Performance was measured before and after the event using a maximal incremental cycling test. Subjects with decreased performance after the event were classified as functionally overreached (FOR) and others as acutely fatigued (AF). A choice reaction time test was performed 2 weeks before (pre), 1 week after (post), and 5 weeks after (follow-up), as well as at the start and end of the event. Results: A total of 14 subjects were classified as AF and 14 as FOR (2 subjects were excluded). During the event, reaction time at the end was 68 ms (95% confidence interval, 46-89) faster than at the start. Reaction time post event was 41 ms (95% confidence interval, 12-71) faster than pre event and follow-up was 55 ms faster (95% confidence interval, 26-83). The time by class interaction was not significant during (P = .26) and after (P = .43) the event. Correlations between physical performance and reaction time were not significant (all Ps < .30). Conclusions: No differences in choice reaction time between AF and FOR subjects were observed. It is suggested that choice reaction time is not valid for early detection of overreaching in the field.

AB - Purpose: Reaction time has been proposed as a training monitoring tool, but to date, results are equivocal. Therefore, it was investigated whether reaction time can be used as a monitoring tool to establish overreaching. Methods: The study included 30 subjects (11 females and 19 males, age: 40.8 [10.8] years, VO2max: 51.8 [6.3] mL/kg/min) who participated in an 8-day cycling event. The external exercise load increased approximately 900% compared with the preparation period. Performance was measured before and after the event using a maximal incremental cycling test. Subjects with decreased performance after the event were classified as functionally overreached (FOR) and others as acutely fatigued (AF). A choice reaction time test was performed 2 weeks before (pre), 1 week after (post), and 5 weeks after (follow-up), as well as at the start and end of the event. Results: A total of 14 subjects were classified as AF and 14 as FOR (2 subjects were excluded). During the event, reaction time at the end was 68 ms (95% confidence interval, 46-89) faster than at the start. Reaction time post event was 41 ms (95% confidence interval, 12-71) faster than pre event and follow-up was 55 ms faster (95% confidence interval, 26-83). The time by class interaction was not significant during (P = .26) and after (P = .43) the event. Correlations between physical performance and reaction time were not significant (all Ps < .30). Conclusions: No differences in choice reaction time between AF and FOR subjects were observed. It is suggested that choice reaction time is not valid for early detection of overreaching in the field.

KW - Cognitive performance

KW - Overreaching

KW - Overtraining

KW - Training monitoring

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85047762772&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85047762772&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1123/ijspp.2017-0218

DO - 10.1123/ijspp.2017-0218

M3 - Article

VL - 13

SP - 428

EP - 433

JO - International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance

JF - International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance

SN - 1555-0265

IS - 4

ER -