Are Measurement Instruments Responsive to Assess Acute Responses to Load in High-Level Youth Soccer Players?

PurposeThe aim of this study was to assess the short-term responsiveness of measurement instruments aiming at quantifying the acute psycho-physiological response to load in high-level adolescent soccer players. MethodsData were collected from 16 high-level male youth soccer players from the Under 15 age group. Players were assessed on two occasions during the week: after 2 days of load accumulation ("high load") and after at least 48 h of rest. Measurements consisted of the Short Recovery and Stress Scale (SRSS), a countermovement jump (CMJ) and a sub-maximal run to assess exercise heart-rate (HRex) and heart-rate recovery (HRR60s). Training load was quantified using total distance and high-speed running distance to express external and sRPE training load to express internal load. It was expected that good instruments can distinguish reliably between high load and rest. ResultsOdd ratios (0.74-1.73) of rating one unit higher or lower were very low for athlete-reported ratings of stress and recovery of the SRSS. Standardized mean high load vs. rest differences for CMJ parameters were trivial to small (-0.31 to 0.34). The degree of evidence against the null hypothesis that changes are interchangeable ranged from p = 0.04 to p = 0.83. Moderate changes were observed for HRex (-0.62; 90% Cl -0.78 to -0.47; p = 3.24 x 10(-9)), while small changes were evident for HRR60s (0.45; 90% Cl 0.08-0.80; p = 0.04). Only small to moderate repeated-measures correlations were found between the accumulation of load and acute responses across all measurement instruments. The strongest relationships were observed between HRex and total distance (rm-r = -0.48; 90% Cl -0.76 to -0.25). ConclusionResults suggest that most of the investigated measurement instruments to assess acute psycho-physiological responses in adolescent soccer players have limited short-term responsiveness. This questions their potential usefulness to detect meaningful changes and manage subsequent training load and program adequate recovery.