{"title":"Recovery Strategies in Endurance Sports: A Survey in Coaches and Athletes.","authors":"Shuting Li, Matthias Kempe, Koen A P M Lemmink","doi":"10.1123/ijspp.2024-0032","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study explored endurance athletes' and coaches' views on recovery strategies, focusing on their use across competition levels, perceived importance and effectiveness, and common barriers.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Endurance athletes (26.6% international, 35.7% national, 28.7% regional, and 9.1% other levels; mean experience 10.04 [7.84] y, n = 143) and coaches (mean experience 17.45 [12.44] y, n = 20) completed an online survey on frequency of usage, perceived importance, effectiveness, and common barriers of 25 recovery strategies. Data were coded and analyzed thematically. A Fisher exact test (P < .05) was conducted on 5-point Likert-scale responses.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Predominant strategies among athletes were hydration, hot showers, and carbohydrate (mean scores 4.62 [0.60], 4.32 [0.82], and 4.17 [0.87]). Only antioxidants showed significant variation in use across levels (P = .033). Coaches favored warm-down/cooling (4.56 [0.62]), hydration (4.41 [0.80]), and extra protein (4.12 [0.70]). Both groups ranked hydration as most important and effective. Athletes ranked extra protein and warm-down/cooling second and third, while coaches considered extra sleep/naps, warm-down/cooling, and extra protein equally important. Barriers of both populations included insufficient time (14.41%), limited knowledge (13.72%), lack of resources (12.63%), and skepticism regarding benefits and effectiveness (12.63%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Athletes show no significant differences in recovery choices based on competitive level, except for antioxidants. Coaches and athletes have partially different views on effective recovery. Furthermore, a lack of time, as well as a lack of (shared) knowledge and education, hinders the effective implementation of recovery strategies for athletes.</p>","PeriodicalId":14295,"journal":{"name":"International journal of sports physiology and performance","volume":" ","pages":"1-11"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of sports physiology and performance","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1123/ijspp.2024-0032","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PHYSIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: This study explored endurance athletes' and coaches' views on recovery strategies, focusing on their use across competition levels, perceived importance and effectiveness, and common barriers.
Methods: Endurance athletes (26.6% international, 35.7% national, 28.7% regional, and 9.1% other levels; mean experience 10.04 [7.84] y, n = 143) and coaches (mean experience 17.45 [12.44] y, n = 20) completed an online survey on frequency of usage, perceived importance, effectiveness, and common barriers of 25 recovery strategies. Data were coded and analyzed thematically. A Fisher exact test (P < .05) was conducted on 5-point Likert-scale responses.
Results: Predominant strategies among athletes were hydration, hot showers, and carbohydrate (mean scores 4.62 [0.60], 4.32 [0.82], and 4.17 [0.87]). Only antioxidants showed significant variation in use across levels (P = .033). Coaches favored warm-down/cooling (4.56 [0.62]), hydration (4.41 [0.80]), and extra protein (4.12 [0.70]). Both groups ranked hydration as most important and effective. Athletes ranked extra protein and warm-down/cooling second and third, while coaches considered extra sleep/naps, warm-down/cooling, and extra protein equally important. Barriers of both populations included insufficient time (14.41%), limited knowledge (13.72%), lack of resources (12.63%), and skepticism regarding benefits and effectiveness (12.63%).
Conclusions: Athletes show no significant differences in recovery choices based on competitive level, except for antioxidants. Coaches and athletes have partially different views on effective recovery. Furthermore, a lack of time, as well as a lack of (shared) knowledge and education, hinders the effective implementation of recovery strategies for athletes.
期刊介绍:
The International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance (IJSPP) focuses on sport physiology and performance and is dedicated to advancing the knowledge of sport and exercise physiologists, sport-performance researchers, and other sport scientists. The journal publishes authoritative peer-reviewed research in sport physiology and related disciplines, with an emphasis on work having direct practical applications in enhancing sport performance in sport physiology and related disciplines. IJSPP publishes 10 issues per year: January, February, March, April, May, July, August, September, October, and November.