{"title":"奥运冰壶运动员工作量量化的会话- rpe。","authors":"Junqi Wu, Chunlei Li","doi":"10.3389/fspor.2025.1636827","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To investigate the correlation between different workload methods among Olympic curling athletes.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Eight curlers were monitored after training during Olympic seasons with three load quantification methods: external load measurements, physiological/biochemical markers, and Omegawave state indices. Intraclass Correlation Coefficient and Bland-Altman plots were used to analyze the Session-RPE index [sRPE workload (RPE × session duration), acute:chronic workload ratio (ACWR), etc.], external [number of draws (the number of curling stones thrown during training/competition), training duration, etc.], and internal [physiological and biochemical indices (testosterone, etc.), and Omegawave sport performance evaluation system indices (comprehensive readiness, etc.)] workloads.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The sRPE index was significantly correlated with external loads and Omegawave sport performance indicators at the 0.01 level (<i>p</i> < 0.01); it was significantly correlated with cortisol and creatine kinase at the 0.05 level (<i>p</i> < 0.05). In the standardized ICC and Bland-Altman plot concordance analyses, the sRPE correlates showed moderate (0.4 < ICC < 0.6) to strong (0.6 < ICC < 0.8) concordance with the corresponding external loading indices, the Omegawave athletic status indices, and average (0.2 < ICC < 0.4) to moderate agreement with the corresponding physiological and biochemical indicators.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The sRPE is a valid curling training-load tool capturing sport-specific demands but retains psychosocial limitations. Appropriate methods should be selected based on actual conditions and needs when choosing how to quantify and evaluate training load.</p>","PeriodicalId":12716,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Sports and Active Living","volume":"7 ","pages":"1636827"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12457370/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Session-RPE for quantifying workload in olympic curling athletes.\",\"authors\":\"Junqi Wu, Chunlei Li\",\"doi\":\"10.3389/fspor.2025.1636827\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To investigate the correlation between different workload methods among Olympic curling athletes.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Eight curlers were monitored after training during Olympic seasons with three load quantification methods: external load measurements, physiological/biochemical markers, and Omegawave state indices. Intraclass Correlation Coefficient and Bland-Altman plots were used to analyze the Session-RPE index [sRPE workload (RPE × session duration), acute:chronic workload ratio (ACWR), etc.], external [number of draws (the number of curling stones thrown during training/competition), training duration, etc.], and internal [physiological and biochemical indices (testosterone, etc.), and Omegawave sport performance evaluation system indices (comprehensive readiness, etc.)] workloads.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The sRPE index was significantly correlated with external loads and Omegawave sport performance indicators at the 0.01 level (<i>p</i> < 0.01); it was significantly correlated with cortisol and creatine kinase at the 0.05 level (<i>p</i> < 0.05). In the standardized ICC and Bland-Altman plot concordance analyses, the sRPE correlates showed moderate (0.4 < ICC < 0.6) to strong (0.6 < ICC < 0.8) concordance with the corresponding external loading indices, the Omegawave athletic status indices, and average (0.2 < ICC < 0.4) to moderate agreement with the corresponding physiological and biochemical indicators.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The sRPE is a valid curling training-load tool capturing sport-specific demands but retains psychosocial limitations. Appropriate methods should be selected based on actual conditions and needs when choosing how to quantify and evaluate training load.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12716,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Frontiers in Sports and Active Living\",\"volume\":\"7 \",\"pages\":\"1636827\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12457370/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Frontiers in Sports and Active Living\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3389/fspor.2025.1636827\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SPORT SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Sports and Active Living","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fspor.2025.1636827","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SPORT SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Session-RPE for quantifying workload in olympic curling athletes.
Objective: To investigate the correlation between different workload methods among Olympic curling athletes.
Materials and methods: Eight curlers were monitored after training during Olympic seasons with three load quantification methods: external load measurements, physiological/biochemical markers, and Omegawave state indices. Intraclass Correlation Coefficient and Bland-Altman plots were used to analyze the Session-RPE index [sRPE workload (RPE × session duration), acute:chronic workload ratio (ACWR), etc.], external [number of draws (the number of curling stones thrown during training/competition), training duration, etc.], and internal [physiological and biochemical indices (testosterone, etc.), and Omegawave sport performance evaluation system indices (comprehensive readiness, etc.)] workloads.
Results: The sRPE index was significantly correlated with external loads and Omegawave sport performance indicators at the 0.01 level (p < 0.01); it was significantly correlated with cortisol and creatine kinase at the 0.05 level (p < 0.05). In the standardized ICC and Bland-Altman plot concordance analyses, the sRPE correlates showed moderate (0.4 < ICC < 0.6) to strong (0.6 < ICC < 0.8) concordance with the corresponding external loading indices, the Omegawave athletic status indices, and average (0.2 < ICC < 0.4) to moderate agreement with the corresponding physiological and biochemical indicators.
Conclusions: The sRPE is a valid curling training-load tool capturing sport-specific demands but retains psychosocial limitations. Appropriate methods should be selected based on actual conditions and needs when choosing how to quantify and evaluate training load.