![]() |
JOURNAL TOOLS |
Opzioni di pubblicazione |
eTOC |
Per abbonarsi |
Sottometti un articolo |
Segnala alla tua biblioteca |
ARTICLE TOOLS |
Publication history |
Estratti |
Permessi |
Per citare questo articolo |
Share |


I TUOI DATI
I TUOI ORDINI
CESTINO ACQUISTI
N. prodotti: 0
Totale ordine: € 0,00
COME ORDINARE
I TUOI ABBONAMENTI
I TUOI ARTICOLI
I TUOI EBOOK
COUPON
ACCESSIBILITÀ
ORIGINAL ARTICLE EXERCISE PHYSIOLOGY AND BIOMECHANICS
The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness 2021 April;61(4):534-41
DOI: 10.23736/S0022-4707.20.11396-3
Copyright © 2020 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA
lingua: Inglese
Workload and well-being across games played on consecutive days during in-season phase in basketball players
Daniele CONTE 1 ✉, Paulius KAMARAUSKAS 1, Davide FERIOLI 2, Aaron T. SCANLAN 3, Sigitas KAMANDULIS 1, Henrikas PAULAUSKAS 1, Inga LUKONAITIENĖ 1
1 Institute of Sport Science and Innovations, Lithuanian Sports University, Kaunas, Lithuania; 2 Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, University of Milan, Milan, Italy; 3 Human Exercise and Training Laboratory, Central Queensland University, Rockhampton, Australia
BACKGROUND: This study aimed to quantify and compare workload and well-being across basketball games played on consecutive days during the in-season phase.
METHODS: Seven players (mean [SD]: age, 20.8 [1.6] y; stature, 195.0 [5.4] cm; body mass, 88.3 [4.2] kg; training experience, 11.6 [3.7] y) competing in the second-tier Lithuanian league were recruited. Changes in workload and well-being were monitored across six NKL games in three separate weeks during the in-season phase, with two games per week played on Friday (Day 1) and Saturday (Day 2). External workload was determined as PlayerLoad (PL) and PL per minute (PL/min) via microsensors. Internal workload was determined as percentage of maximum heart rate (%HRmax), summated heart rate zones (SHRZ) workload, and session-rating of perceived exertion (sRPE) workload. Well-being was evaluated using questionnaires assessing fatigue, sleep quality, general muscle soreness, stress levels and mood. Linear mixed models and effect size analyses were used to compare workload and well-being between Day 1 and Day 2.
RESULTS: Significantly lower PL/min (P=0.029; ES=0.26, small), greater perception of fatigue (P<0.001; ES=1.31, large) and lower total well-being score (P<0.001; ES=0.59, small) were observed for basketball games played on Day 2 compared to games played on Day 1.
CONCLUSIONS: Two games played on consecutive days elicited similar game workloads with higher perceived fatigue and lower well-being in the second game day. These findings suggest basketball coaches using recovery strategies to optimize player well-being during congested game schedules.
KEY WORDS: Exercise; Fatigue; Sports; Health