Introduction The assessment of the Rate of Perceived Exertion (RPE) is widespread in soccer to calculate the session-RPE that is a valid method to assess training load (TL) (Foster et al., 2001). Instructions on the RPE assessment indicated that the rating has to be collected confidentially (CONF) after the training1, however sometimes fitness coaches use a non-confidential (NCONF) modality that may be biased by the influence of other players. The aim of this study was to examine the effect of NCONF modality on the RPE rating. Methods Twenty young soccer players (age 16±0.1 years, height 176±8 cm, body mass 67±13 kg) participated in a crossover design study. After presentation of the Borg CR-100 scale, players were familiarized with the scale for 3 weeks. A memory and exercise (Yo-Yo Intermittent Recovery Level 1) procedures were used to anchor the scale. Players were randomly divided in 2 conditions: CONF and NCONF. Internal TL was assessed with heart rate based methods: Edward’s TL and Banister TRIMP. External TL was monitored in 8 players with GPS as total distance (TD) and high intensity distance (HI>14.4km/h). After each session the players were interviewed (CONF) or wrote their RPE value on a blackboard attached in the team dressing room (NCONF). Mean differences (90%CI) in RPE, internal and external TL between the 2 conditions were analyzed. Coefficients of variation (CV) were calculated for RPE and Bland & Altman plot with limits of agreement (LOA) were used two check interchangeability between the two assessments. Results No differences were found for Edward’s TL and Bannister TRIMP in the 2 conditions (mean difference, 90%CI: 3.0, -1.7 to 7.7 AU and 1.9, - 1.1 to 4.8 AU). No differences were found for TD and HIR in the 2 conditions (mean difference, 90%CI: -93, -269 to 83m and -66, -157 to 25m). RPE were 31.3±7.3 and 30.1±4.4 AU with no difference between the 2 conditions (-0.4, -2.2 to 1.5 AU). CV were 0.23 (90%CI 0.19 to 0.32) and 0.14 (90%CL 0.11 to 0.20) for CONF and NCONF, respectively. Bland & Altman plot showed bias -0.35 (95%CI: -2.6 to 1.9) and LOA of -9.7 to 9.0 AU. Discussion Two training sessions with the same internal and external TLs were performed. RPE assessed in 2 different modalities showed similar values. However, the variability in NCONF condition was lower than in CONF, Bland Altman plot showed that some players provide different rating in the 2 conditions. The first RPE written in the NCONF modality may have influenced subsequent players in their rating. Coaches should use a confidential modality and follow instructions in the assessment of RPE. References Foster C et al. J. Strength Cond. Res. 15:109–115,2001

EFFECT OF THE COLLECTING METHOD ON SESSION-RPE IN YOUTH SOCCER PLAYERS

Fanchini M.
;
Modena R.;
2017-01-01

Abstract

Introduction The assessment of the Rate of Perceived Exertion (RPE) is widespread in soccer to calculate the session-RPE that is a valid method to assess training load (TL) (Foster et al., 2001). Instructions on the RPE assessment indicated that the rating has to be collected confidentially (CONF) after the training1, however sometimes fitness coaches use a non-confidential (NCONF) modality that may be biased by the influence of other players. The aim of this study was to examine the effect of NCONF modality on the RPE rating. Methods Twenty young soccer players (age 16±0.1 years, height 176±8 cm, body mass 67±13 kg) participated in a crossover design study. After presentation of the Borg CR-100 scale, players were familiarized with the scale for 3 weeks. A memory and exercise (Yo-Yo Intermittent Recovery Level 1) procedures were used to anchor the scale. Players were randomly divided in 2 conditions: CONF and NCONF. Internal TL was assessed with heart rate based methods: Edward’s TL and Banister TRIMP. External TL was monitored in 8 players with GPS as total distance (TD) and high intensity distance (HI>14.4km/h). After each session the players were interviewed (CONF) or wrote their RPE value on a blackboard attached in the team dressing room (NCONF). Mean differences (90%CI) in RPE, internal and external TL between the 2 conditions were analyzed. Coefficients of variation (CV) were calculated for RPE and Bland & Altman plot with limits of agreement (LOA) were used two check interchangeability between the two assessments. Results No differences were found for Edward’s TL and Bannister TRIMP in the 2 conditions (mean difference, 90%CI: 3.0, -1.7 to 7.7 AU and 1.9, - 1.1 to 4.8 AU). No differences were found for TD and HIR in the 2 conditions (mean difference, 90%CI: -93, -269 to 83m and -66, -157 to 25m). RPE were 31.3±7.3 and 30.1±4.4 AU with no difference between the 2 conditions (-0.4, -2.2 to 1.5 AU). CV were 0.23 (90%CI 0.19 to 0.32) and 0.14 (90%CL 0.11 to 0.20) for CONF and NCONF, respectively. Bland & Altman plot showed bias -0.35 (95%CI: -2.6 to 1.9) and LOA of -9.7 to 9.0 AU. Discussion Two training sessions with the same internal and external TLs were performed. RPE assessed in 2 different modalities showed similar values. However, the variability in NCONF condition was lower than in CONF, Bland Altman plot showed that some players provide different rating in the 2 conditions. The first RPE written in the NCONF modality may have influenced subsequent players in their rating. Coaches should use a confidential modality and follow instructions in the assessment of RPE. References Foster C et al. J. Strength Cond. Res. 15:109–115,2001
2017
Rpe, assessment, youth soccer
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11562/1144051
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus ND
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact