The monitoring of performance progress due to long-term physical activity by paper-based training diaries: do training diaries reflect training progress?

Abstract

INTRODUCTION Training diaries are a common tool for training monitoring; however, their correlation with an effective performance gain is unclear. OBJECTIVES The aim of this prospective study was to investigate whether monitoring of training by paper based training diaries reflects the training progress measured by a bicycle stress test in hobby athletes. PATIENTS AND METHODS Out of 109 hobby athletes who were instructed to work out for 8 months with a calculated training pulse, 98 participants completed the study. Training workload (intensity and time) was recorded with special training diaries. To assess the objective performance gain or change, the bicycle stress test was performed at baseline and at the end of the study. Surrogate parameters associ ated with increased physical activity were also recorded. RESULTS Participants who had a performance gain of at least 3% (mean gain of about 12%) in the bicycle stress test worked out between 547 and 576 min/mo with moderate intensity, and between 14 and 187 min/mo with high intensity. Neither moderate nor high intensity training correlated with the performance gain. CONCLUSIONS Paper based training diaries might serve as an additional tool in the monitoring of train ing progress. However, because of the discrepancy between reported training loads and objectively measured training progress, they are not suitable to replace a standard bicycle stress test for an exact determination of performance gain in hobby athletes. New devices, such as fitness trackers or watches, may present better alternatives in the future.

A Combination of Context Input Process Product and Kirkpatrick Evaluation Model to Determine the Effectiveness of E-Training for Principals during COVID-19 Pandemic

“…Monitoring and evaluating the training helps to find out the impact of the training (Hanaysha & Tahir, 2016;Mpofu & Hlatywayo, 2015). The monitoring and evaluation of the training can help to discover the impact of the training, so it is important to conduct the monitoring and evaluation after the training (Altavilla, 2019;Foster et al, 2017;Schukro et al, 2019). The problem of the network, the limitation of interaction and communication, and the results of previous research show that not all participants adopt online training due to the difficulty of accessibility and psychological problems (Alavudeen et al, 2021;Maqableh & Alia, 2021).…”

Regular Training Increases sTWEAK and Its Decoy Receptor sCD163–Does Training Trigger the sTWEAK/sCD163-Axis to Induce an Anti-Inflammatory Effect?

“…Although the participants had training diaries (which were shown to be unsuitable for exact training observation [8]) we used bicycle stress tests for an exact and objective determination of the performance levels at baseline and, in particular, the performance gain after eight months of training. The bicycle stress tests were always performed with the same system (Ergometer eBike comfort, GE Medical Systems, Freiburg, Germany) in all participants with the following protocol: starting resistance of 25 watts, a 25-watts resistance increase every 2 min (according to the protocol of the Austrian Society of Cardiology, which is equal to the guidelines of the European Society of Cardiology).…”