Next Article in Journal
From Mind to Mouth: Understanding Active Publics in China and Their Communicative Behaviors on GM Foods
Previous Article in Journal
Fast Air-to-Liquid Sampler Detects Surges in SARS-CoV-2 Aerosol Levels in Hospital Rooms
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
IJERPH
Volume 20
Issue 1
10.3390/ijerph20010579
ijerph-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Effects of Game Weekly Frequency on Subjective Training Load, Wellness, and Injury Rate in Male Elite Soccer Players

by
Rim Sioud
1,
Raouf Hammami
1,2,
Javier Gene-Morales
3,4,
Alvaro Juesas
3,
Juan C. Colado
3 and
Roland van den Tillaar
5,*
1
Tunisian Research Laboratory “Sports Performance Optimization”, National Center of Medicine and Science in Sports (CNMSS), Higher Institute of Sport and Physical Education of Ksar Said, Manouba University, Tunis 2010, Tunisia
2
Research Laboratory, Education, Motor Skills, Sports and Health (LR19JS01), Higher Institute of Sport and Physical Education of Sfax, University of Sfax, Sfax 3029, Tunisia
3
Research Group Prevention and Health in Exercise and Sport (PHES), University of Valencia, 46010 Valencia, Spain
4
Department of Didactics of Musical, Plastic, and Body Expression, University of Valladolid, 47002 Valladolid, Spain
5
Department of Sport Sciences and Physical Education, Nord University, 7601 Levanger, Norway
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2023, 20(1), 579; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20010579
Submission received: 30 November 2022 / Revised: 26 December 2022 / Accepted: 27 December 2022 / Published: 29 December 2022
(This article belongs to the Section Sport and Health)
Browse Figure
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
To compare the effects of playing one or two games per week on subjective perceived exertion (RPE) and (RPE-based) training load, monotony index, sleep, stress, fatigue, and muscle soreness (Hooper index), total mood disturbance, and injury rate in elite soccer players. Fourteen males from a first-division soccer club (age: 24.42 ± 4.80 years) competed in two games per week for six weeks and one game per week for twelve weeks (a total of 24 games). Paired t-tests and non-parametric Wilcoxon signed ranks evaluated the significance of the differences (p < 0.05). The main findings were that RPE was significantly larger when playing two games per week compared with one game. However, subject total and mean training load, mood disturbance, monotony, and subjective perception of sleep, stress, fatigue, muscle soreness monitoring (Hooper index), and the number of injuries were not different. The findings suggested that competing in two matches per week does not negatively influence injury rate and players’ perceptions of training load or wellness, even though players perceive two games per week as more physically demanding compared with one game per week.

1. Introduction

Soccer performance analysis is crucial and is usually related to a systematic change in the training load [1,2,3], in order to evaluate players’ achievement [4]. Training load variables, such as duration, frequency, and intensity, play an interactive role in improving and regulating physical capacity and performance [5]. In this context, researchers and coaches have defined soccer as a psychophysiological phenomenon [6,7], as the subtle changes in load and strain have a large effect on physiological and psychological variables in addition to wellness [2,6,8].
Over the last decades, researchers have utilized several psychological questionnaires aimed to monitor training stress, wellness, mood states, and strain to detect early signs of tiredness and/or overtraining and optimize high-level soccer training performance [2,9,10,11,12,13,14]. In this context, previous research [15,16,17] proposed a psychometric questionnaire based on self-assessment involving well-being ratings relative to sleep, stress, fatigue, and muscle soreness. Such a measure is useful in the longitudinal assessment of players’ perceptions over a season or longer. While previous studies have investigated the relationship between external and internal load and well-being in soccer players [18,19,20], the long-term effect of multiple matches played within a few days on related psychophysical parameters (i.e., perceived internal training load, feeling sensation, and injury rates) in professional soccer players is unknown.
Understanding how players’ perceptions of well-being, mood, and other parameters might change relative to the volume of soccer activity undertaken is key in managing players’ physical and psychological loads [21]. This is important because soccer players often must play up to two competitive matches in a week. In this sense, previous research [8,22] suggested that a recovery time of 72 to 96 h between two consecutive games is adequate to maintain physical performance. However, more is needed to reduce the injury rate compared to one game per week. Additionally, previous studies reported that players’ repeated jump and sprint performances are dropped immediately after a match [23,24], and ratings of muscle soreness remain elevated up to 72 h after 90 min of competitive soccer [25]. Similarly, Rollo, et al. [12] concluded that players’ ability to sprint, jump, and perform repeated intense exercise was impaired when playing two competitive matches a week over six weeks.
Given the importance of monitoring training load in soccer, the assessment of related variables has become commonly used in the literature and practice. Several studies [2,7,11] have supported the effectiveness of questionnaires for monitoring training-related perceived stress, wellness, strain, and recovery in players to detect early signs of tiredness and/or overtraining. Based on the available literature [26,27], it is reasonable to speculate that the physical performance of soccer players is reduced when they are involved in two or more weekly matches over prolonged periods. However, to our knowledge, no studies have examined how playing multiple soccer games in a week (i.e., one vs. two) may affect players’ well-being. Furthermore, more information on the effect of one vs. two playing games a week on subjective psychometric scores of training load and exertion (RPE), sleep, stress, fatigue, muscle soreness, mood state, and injury rate, is needed.
Therefore, this study aimed to analyze the differences between playing one or two competitive games a week on elite male footballers’ total and mean load, perceived exertion, monotony index, mood state disturbance, sleep, stress, fatigue, muscle soreness, and injury rate. Regarding the abovementioned, we hypothesized that playing two games per week compared to one would negatively affect the study’s dependent variables.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Experimental Approach to the Problem

This was a longitudinal design in which the effect of one versus two games per week was tested in elite male footballers’ total and mean load, perceived exertion, monotony index, mood state disturbance, sleep, stress, fatigue, muscle soreness, and injury rate. During each training session and competition, each player was given a questionnaire to gather data on mood state disturbance, sleep, stress, fatigue, and muscle soreness. The rate of perceived exertion (RPE) was collected 30 min after each game and training session [28]. The injury rate was monitored during the eighteen weeks of the study (24 games). Throughout the study, players were asked to maintain their routine nutritional habits.

2.2. Participants

The number of observations taken from each player (i.e., the number of games played in 1 game/week and that played in 2 games/week) may add biases to the study design. Therefore, an inclusion criterion of participating in at least 80% of the games of the study frame (with the same number of games in 1 game/week and 2 games/week) was established. Four participants were discarded from the study due to not complying with this criterion.
Finally, fourteen elite male soccer players (mean age: 24.42 ± 4.80 years, body mass: 78.62 ± 6.36 kg, height: 179.57 ± 7.01 cm; body mass index: 24.36 ± 1.11 kg/m2; body fat percentage: 13.04 ± 1.24%) belonging to one soccer club playing at the highest national division, participated in the study. All participants were experienced footballers (> than 7 years of competitive football experience) accustomed to physical training and regular competitive match play. All players were injury-free in the month before the start of the study. The players were fully informed of any possible risks and discomforts associated with the testing procedures and gave their written consent before participating. The present study was conducted according to the latest version of the Declaration of Helsinki. The protocol was fully approved by the Local Ethics Committee of the National Centre of Medicine and Science of Sports of Tunis (CNMSS-LR09SEP01).

2.3. Procedures

All the procedures were conducted in-season. During eighteen weeks divided into two periods, the 14 players participated in one official game (Sunday) or two (Sunday and Wednesday, around 72 h between games) per week. The first period comprised six weeks with two games per week and the second period, with one game per week, lasted twelve weeks to equate the total number of games. These two periods were separated by one month to avoid biases. They were engaged in 90 min training sessions of standard sport-specific training 5 times per week (passing, small-sided games, and ball shooting). During both designs, the training sessions comprised a warm-up, technical and tactical skill development as well as conditioning (aerobic and anaerobic training, speed, and agility training), and finally a cool-down.
All participants were familiarized with the training protocols prior to the investigation. After that, each Monday before the training session, all the players were provided with a questionnaire to gather data on mood state disturbance, sleep, stress, fatigue, and muscle soreness. The rate of perceived exertion (RPE) was collected 30 min after each game and training session [28]. The injury rate was monitored during the eighteen weeks of the study. The mean of all mood, load, injury rates, and RPE scores was calculated for each period and used for further analysis.
Each participant’s body height and mass were collected before starting the study using a wall-mounted stadiometer (Holtain Limited, Crosswell, Wales, UK) and an electronic scale (Electronics Development, New York, NY, USA), respectively. The sum of skinfolds was assessed using Harpenden skinfold calipers (Baty International, Burgess Hill, UK). Body measurements were conducted according to previous expert literature [29].
RPE was collected after each game and training session using the 10-point Borg’s scale [30] proposed by Foster, et al. [31]. This subjective estimation of the physiological load was obtained by asking each player: “How did you perceive your exertion during the training session?”. The use of the 10-point Borg’s scale modified by Foster, et al. [31] has largely been credited as the top five practical, cost-effective, and valid methods of quantifying internal training loads in soccer [32,33].
The session RPE-based training load was then calculated by multiplying the RPE value by the session duration [28,34]. The total weekly load obtained from 3 (two games a week) versus 5 (one game a week) training sessions was calculated as the sum of the training load of each training session of a given week. Then, the mean load calculated during the one-game-a-week condition for every 5 training sessions and during the two-game week period for 3 training sessions, was obtained by dividing the total load by the number of sessions of the week, and the standard deviation was also calculated [2,34].
The training monotony, measured every 2 days and calculated by the average over-time training variability, was calculated by dividing the mean load by the standard deviation [34].
Total mood disturbance was evaluated by the Profile of Mood States (POMS) questionnaire [35,36,37] after each training session and evaluated for the last 24 h. This self-report questionnaire consists of 65 adjectives aimed at assessing six states (anger-hostility, confusion-bewilderment, depression-dejection, fatigue-inertia, tension-anxiety, and vigor-activity) on a 5-point Likert scale, being 0 “not at all” and 4 “extremely”. Total mood disturbance was calculated as the sum of the five negative sub-scores minus the positive score plus a constant of 100 to avoid negative values. The following formula was used:
Total mood disturbance = ([anger + confusion + depression + fatigue + tension] − vigor) + 100 Sleep, stress, fatigue, and muscle soreness monitoring
Upon arrival at the training session, players responded to questions extracted from Hooper questionnaires [17]. Questions included the players’ subjective perception about (i) the quality of sleep during the preceding night, (ii) quantity of stress, (iii) fatigue, and (iv) muscle soreness. Possible answers for each of these parameters ranged from “extremely low or good” (point 1) to “extremely high or bad” (point 7) [2]. The Hooper index was calculated as the addition of these four ratings.
The injury rate was calculated as all injuries obtained in the two conditions period (one vs. two games a week) and as an injury frequency during each mentioned period (training and matches) [8]. The effects of one vs. two matches per week on injury rate were analyzed for the 14 players during the study, which comprised eighteen weeks with 24 games.

2.4. Statistical Analyses

All the statistical analyses were carried out using commercial software IBM SPSS Statistics for Macintosh (Version 27.0; IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA) and G*Power 3.0 [38]. The significance level for this study was established at p < 0.05. Results are reported as mean, standard deviation, and 95% confidence interval (CI).
The normality of data distribution was assessed using the Shapiro–Wilk test. Only the total mood disturbance and the hooper index showed a normal-gaussian distribution in both measurements (p > 0.05). It is also worth mentioning that the total load and mean load showed a normal-gaussian distribution only in the one-game per week measurement. All the rest of the variables (total load [in the two-day per week measurement], monotony index, mean load [in the two-day per week measurement], injury rate, and RPE) followed a non-normal distribution (p ≤ 0.05).
To assess differences between both game distributions (i.e., one game per week and two games per week) parametric paired t-tests and non-parametric Wilcoxon signed-ranks tests were used for the normally distributed and non-normal variables, respectively. The effect size was calculated as Cohen’s d with Hedges’ corrections to avoid biases due to sample size or standard deviation differences [39]. This corrected value is reported as unbiased Cohen’s d (dunb) [38], with dunb < 0.50 constituting a small effect, 0.50 ≤ dunb ≤ 0.79 a moderate effect, and dunb ≥ 0.80 a large effect [40].
Test–retest reliability of the variables was assessed using Cronbach’s model of intraclass correlation coefficient (ICCs) and standard error of measurements (SEM) according to the method of Hopkins [41]. According to Weir [42], we used ICC Model 3, k (i.e., the average of multiple scores of each subject measured by the same researchers).

3. Results

Table 1 displays the test–retest reliability analyses for all the tests conducted. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) showed good reliability for all tests (values ranging from 0.86 to 0.91), with a standard error of measurement (SEM) from 1.37 to 3.49, and a coefficient of variation of <5%. Furthermore, paired t-tests showed no significant differences (p > 0.05) between the scores recorded during the two trials for all measured variables.
Descriptive and inferential analyses of the dependent variables are presented in Table 2. The most notable finding was that the RPE was the only variable showing significant differences between the 2 games/week condition and 1 game/week condition (greater RPE when playing two games per week) with a large effect size (dunb = 11.04). On the other hand, no significant differences (p > 0.05) were observed in the rest of the study variables.
Figure 1 graphically presents the outcomes of the only variable (i.e., RPE) that presented significant differences between competing in one or two games per week.

4. Discussion

The present study examined the impact of playing one versus two competitive soccer games per week on the training load and perceived exertion, monotony index, mood state disturbance, hooper index, and injury rate in elite male soccer players. The main finding was that RPE was significantly larger when playing two games per week compared with one game. However, subjective load, total mood disturbance, monotony, subjective perception of sleep, stress, fatigue, injury rates, and muscle soreness monitoring (Hooper index) were not different between the two conditions.
The elevated RPE scores in the two-game-a-week group compared to the one-game-a-week group were not unexpected. Prior work using RPE as a measure of subjective training load has reported this parameter to be sensitive to actual training loads undertaken and that higher RPE is observed when players undertake greater training loads [2,43,44]. The results of the current study in this respect are not new. However, they demonstrate, that competing twice per week is perceived as significantly more strenuous compared to one competition per week.
Given the higher RPE reported for the two games per week condition, it was expected that there were also differences in subjective training load, which only revealed small effect sizes (see Table 2). This could be explained by the lower number of weekly training sessions per week (3 vs. 5) in the 2-games condition. This decreases the total and mean subjective training load. In addition, no significant effects were found in the total mood disturbance, monotony index, or hooper index (for sleep, stress, fatigue, and muscle soreness). This suggests that playing two games per week did not influence the player’s perception of training load much over the 2-games period, together with fatigue and muscle soreness. Thereby, this increase in the competition frequency did not compromise player wellness. Earlier similar studies with two competitions a week and three training sessions have also indicated that it does not affect performance variables after 72–96 h [8] nor stress and recovery indexes [12]. On the other hand, another study reported that sprint, jump, and intense exercise performance were impaired 48 h post-match when players engaged in around two competitive games per week over six weeks [12,21]. Additionally, previous expert literature reported that periods with congested match playing can decrease physical and mental fitness in elite soccer players, relying these changes on psychological rather than hormonal parameters [21].
Regarding the injury rate, our results demonstrated no significant effects of playing twice-a-week games compared to once-a-week, which could be a key observation of the present study. Prior studies examining the effects of different frequencies of competitive games on physical performance variables have reported significantly higher muscle damage [42,45] and injury rates [8] with increasing games per week. In this sense, it is worth highlighting that different approaches to what an injury is may result in varying results within the literature [46]. Rollo, et al. [12] noted that a lack of data regarding injury risk hampers conclusions about game frequency and player performance. In this regard, our results regarding the invariable injury rate with two games a week only refer to six weeks. Therefore, two games per week for longer than six weeks may increase cumulative injury risk. Research examining this issue is necessary to draw robust conclusions.
There are more limitations in the study besides the short period of six weeks. Although the players maintained the same volume of training outside games across the whole study, the lack of monitoring other aspects of physical load (e.g., heart rate, lactate) experienced by the participants during the study is a limitation. Likewise, we did not assess dietary intake during the period and nutritional practices can influence performance and perception of performance and related factors in soccer [47]. Therefore, future work examining training load and/or player wellness over a prolonged period should also consider incorporating physiological load parameters and dietary assessment. Finally, in the present study, the congested fixture took place in the first part of the study. A congested fixture is supposed to affect players’ performance only if they play all games. To control this and reduce potential biases, we established an inclusion criterion of participating in at least 80% of the games of the study (same number of games in 1 game/week and 2 games/week). According to the procedures of the present study, other statistical procedures such as generalized estimating equation (GEE) could provide further details on players’ responses to the weekly frequency of games.
Despite the mentioned limitations and while caution should be applied until more scientific evidence arrives, the present study strengthens the idea that elite soccer athletes can compete in two games per week without having higher injury rates or subjective training load, or lower wellness. Playing two games per week negatively affected the physical demands perception of the athletes.

5. Conclusions

Playing two competitive matches per week over six weeks does not significantly influence subjective training load, wellness, and injury incidence. On the other hand, players do perceive two games a week as more physically demanding (via RPE).

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, R.H. and R.S.; formal analysis, R.H. and R.S.; methodology, R.S., R.H. and A.J.; writing—original draft, R.H. and R.S.; writing—review and editing, R.v.d.T., J.G.-M. and J.C.C. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted according to the institutional ethical requirements, and the protocol was fully approved by the Local Ethics Committee of the National Centre of Medicine and Science of Sports of Tunis (CNMSS-LR09SEP01 and in accordance with the latest revision of the Declaration of Helsinki.

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects and guardians involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available on reasonable request from the corresponding author.

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank the participants and the research assistants involved in the data collection.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Bangsbo, J.; Mohr, M.; Krustrup, P. Physical and metabolic demands of training and match-play in the elite football player. J. Sport. Sci. 2006, 24, 665–674. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Fessi, M.S.; Nouira, S.; Dellal, A.; Owen, A.; Elloumi, M.; Moalla, W. Changes of the psychophysical state and feeling of wellness of professional soccer players during pre-season and in-season periods. Res. Sport. Med. 2016, 24, 375–386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Nobari, H.; Arslan, E.; Martins, A.D.; Oliveira, R. Are acute: Chronic workload ratios of perceived exertion and running based variables sensible to detect variations between player positions over the season? A soccer team study. BMC Sport. Sci. Med. Rehabil. 2022, 14, 51. [Google Scholar]
  4. Carling, C.; Bloomfield, J.; Nelson, L.; Reilly, T. The role of motion analysis in elite soccer: Contemporary performance measurement techniques and work rate data. Sport. Med. 2012, 38, 389. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Mujika, I.; Padilla, S. Scientific bases for precompetition tapering strategies. Med. Sci. Sport. Exerc. 2003, 35, 1182–1187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Malone, S.; Owen, A.; Mendes, B.; Hughes, B.; Collins, K.; Gabbett, T.J. High-speed running and sprinting as an injury risk factor in soccer: Can well-developed physical qualities reduce the risk? J. Sci. Med. Sport 2018, 21, 257–262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  7. Thorpe, R.T.; Strudwick, A.J.; Buchheit, M.; Atkinson, G.; Drust, B.; Gregson, W. Monitoring fatigue during the in-season competitive phase in elite soccer players. Int. J. Sport. Physiol. Perform. 2015, 10, 958–964. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  8. Dupont, G.; Nedelec, M.; McCall, A.; McCormack, D.; Berthoin, S.; Wisløff, U. Effect of 2 soccer matches in a week on physical performance and injury rate. Am. J. Sport. Med. 2010, 38, 1752–1758. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Soylu, Y.; Ramazanoglu, F.; Arslan, E.; Clemente, F. Effects of mental fatigue on the psychophysiological responses, kinematic profiles, and technical performance in different small-sided soccer games. Biol. Sport 2022, 39, 965–972. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Arslan, E.; Kilit, B.; Clemente, F.M.; Soylu, Y.; Sögüt, M.; Badicu, G.; Akca, F.; Gokkaya, M.; Murawska-Ciałowicz, E. The effects of exercise order on the psychophysiological responses, physical and technical performances of young soccer players: Combined small-sided games and high-intensity interval training. Biology 2021, 10, 1180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Fessi, M.S.; Moalla, W. Postmatch perceived exertion, feeling, and wellness in professional soccer players. Int. J. Sport. Physiol. Perform. 2018, 13, 631–637. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Rollo, I.; Impellizzeri, F.M.; Zago, M.; Iaia, F.M. Effects of 1 versus 2 games a week on physical and subjective scores of subelite soccer players. Int. J. Sport. Physiol. Perform. 2014, 9, 425–431. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Saw, A.E.; Main, L.C.; Gastin, P.B. Monitoring the athlete training response: Subjective self-reported measures trump commonly used objective measures: A systematic review. Br. J. Sport. Med. 2016, 50, 281–291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Buchheit, M.; Racinais, S.; Bilsborough, J.; Bourdon, P.; Voss, S.; Hocking, J.; Cordy, J.; Mendez-Villanueva, A.; Coutts, A. Monitoring fitness, fatigue and running performance during a pre-season training camp in elite football players. J. Sci. Med. Sport 2013, 16, 550–555. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Oliva Lozano, J.M.; Muyor, J.M.; Pérez-Guerra, A.; Gómez, D.; Garcia-Unanue, J.; Sanchez-Sanchez, J.; Felipe, J.L. Effect of the Length of the Microcycle on the Daily External Load, Fatigue, Sleep Quality, Stress, and Muscle Soreness of Professional Soccer Players: A Full-Season Study. Sport. Health 2022, 19417381221131531. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Clemente, F.; Silva, R.; Arslan, E.; Aquino, R.; Castillo, D.; Mendes, B. The effects of congested fixture periods on distance-based workload indices: A full-season study in professional soccer players. Biol. Sport 2021, 38, 37–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Hooper, S.L.; Mackinnon, L.T. Monitoring overtraining in athletes. Sport. Med. 1995, 20, 321–327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Nobari, H.; Gholizadeh, R.; Martins, A.D.; Badicu, G.; Oliveira, R. In-Season Quantification and Relationship of External and Internal Intensity, Sleep Quality, and Psychological or Physical Stressors of Semi-Professional Soccer Players. Biology 2022, 11, 467. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Nobari, H.; Aquino, R.; Clemente, F.M.; Khalafi, M.; Adsuar, J.C.; Pérez-Gómez, J. Description of acute and chronic load, training monotony and strain over a season and its relationships with well-being status: A study in elite under-16 soccer players. Physiol. Behav. 2020, 225, 113117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Nobari, H.; Fani, M.; Clemente, F.M.; Carlos-Vivas, J.; Pérez-Gómez, J.; Ardigò, L.P. Intra-and inter-week variations of well-being across a season: A cohort study in elite youth male soccer players. Front. Psychol. 2021, 12, 671072. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Saidi, K.; Ben Abderrahman, A.; Boullosa, D.; Dupont, G.; Hackney, A.C.; Bideau, B.; Pavillon, T.; Granacher, U.; Zouhal, H. The interplay between plasma hormonal concentrations, physical fitness, workload and mood state changes to periods of congested match play in professional soccer players. Front. Physiol. 2020, 11, 835. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Maupin, D.; Schram, B.; Canetti, E.; Orr, R. The relationship between acute: Chronic workload ratios and injury risk in sports: A systematic review. Open Access J. Sport. Med. 2020, 11, 51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  23. Andersson, H.M.; Raastad, T.; Nilsson, J.; Paulsen, G.; Garthe, I.; Kadi, F. Neuromuscular fatigue and recovery in elite female soccer: Effects of active recovery. Med. Sci. Sport. Exerc. 2008, 40, 372–380. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  24. Krustrup, P.; Zebis, M.; Jensen, J.M.; Mohr, M. Game-induced fatigue patterns in elite female soccer. J. Strength Cond. Res. 2010, 24, 437–441. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  25. Krustrup, P.; Ørtenblad, N.; Nielsen, J.; Nybo, L.; Gunnarsson, T.P.; Iaia, F.M.; Madsen, K.; Stephens, F.; Greenhaff, P.; Bangsbo, J. Maximal voluntary contraction force, SR function and glycogen resynthesis during the first 72 h after a high-level competitive soccer game. Eur. J. Appl. Physiol. 2011, 111, 2987–2995. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Silva, R.; Lima, R.; Camões, M.; Leão, C.; Matos, S.; Pereira, J.; Bezerra, P.; Clemente, F.M. Physical fitness changes among amateur soccer players: Effects of the pre-season period. Biomed. Hum. Kinet. 2021, 13, 63–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Hernández-Davo, J.L.; Pérez, V.M.; Navarro, P.M. Effects of playing 1 vs 3 matches in a one-week period on physical performance in young soccer players. Biol. Sport 2022, 39, 819–823. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Impellizzeri, F.M.; Rampinini, E.; Coutts, A.J.; Sassi, A.; Marcora, S.M. Use of RPE-based training load in soccer. Med. Sci. Sport. Exerc. 2004, 36, 1042–1047. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Durnin, J.V.; Womersley, J. Body fat assessed from total body density and its estimation from skinfold thickness: Measurements on 481 men and women aged from 16 to 72 years. Br. J. Nutr. 1974, 32, 77–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  30. Borg, G.; Hassmén, P.; Lagerström, M. Perceived exertion related to heart rate and blood lactate during arm and leg exercise. Eur. J. Appl. Physiol. Occup. Physiol. 1987, 56, 679–685. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Foster, C.; Florhaug, J.A.; Franklin, J.; Gottschall, L.; Hrovatin, L.A.; Parker, S.; Doleshal, P.; Dodge, C. A new approach to monitoring exercise training. J. Strength Cond. Res. 2001, 15, 109–115. [Google Scholar]
  32. Akenhead, R.; Nassis, G.P. Training load and player monitoring in high-level football: Current practice and perceptions. Int. J. Sport. Physiol. Perform. 2016, 11, 587–593. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Gaudino, P.; Iaia, F.M.; Strudwick, A.J.; Hawkins, R.D.; Alberti, G.; Atkinson, G.; Gregson, W. Factors influencing perception of effort (session rating of perceived exertion) during elite soccer training. Int. J. Sport. Physiol. Perform. 2015, 10, 860–864. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  34. Foster, C. Monitoring training in athletes with reference to overtraining syndrome. Med. Sci. Sport. Exerc. 1998, 30, 1164–1168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  35. Hill, D.W.; Welch, J.E.; Godfrey, J.A. Influence of locus of control on mood state disturbance after short-term sleep deprivation. Sleep 1996, 19, 41–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  36. Cutler, N.R.; Cohen, H.B. The effect of one night’s sleep loss on mood and memory in normal subjects. Comprehensive Psychiatry 1979, 20, 61–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. McNair, D.; Lorr, M.; Droppleman, L. Manual for the Profile of Mood States (POMS), Revised; Educational and Industrial Testing Service: San Diego, CA, USA, 1992. [Google Scholar]
  38. Cumming, G. The new statistics: Why and how. Psychol. Sci. 2014, 25, 7–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Lakens, D. Calculating and reporting effect sizes to facilitate cumulative science: A practical primer for t-tests and ANOVAs. Front. Psychol. 2013, 4, 863. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  40. Cohen, J. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences; Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: Hillsdale, NJ, USA, 1988; p. 174. [Google Scholar]
  41. Hopkins, W.G. Competitive performance of elite track-and-field athletes: Variability and smallest worthwhile enhancements. Sportscience 2005, 9, 17–21. [Google Scholar]
  42. Oliveira, R.; Brito, J.; Martins, A.; Mendes, B.; Calvete, F.; Carriço, S.; Ferraz, R.; Marques, M.C. In-season training load quantification of one-, two-and three-game week schedules in a top European professional soccer team. Physiol. Behav. 2019, 201, 146–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Bosquet, L.; Montpetit, J.; Arvisais, D.; Mujika, I. Effects of tapering on performance: A meta-analysis. Med. Sci. Sport. Exerc. 2007, 39, 1358–1365. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  44. Coutts, A.J.; Rampinini, E.; Marcora, S.M.; Castagna, C.; Impellizzeri, F.M. Heart rate and blood lactate correlates of perceived exertion during small-sided soccer games. J. Sci. Med. Sport 2009, 12, 79–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. García-Romero-Pérez, Á.; Ordonez, F.J.; Reyes-Gil, F.; Rodríguez-López, E.S.; Oliva-Pascual-Vaca, Á. Muscle damage biomarkers in congestion weeks in English premier league soccer players: A prospective study for two consecutive seasons. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 7960. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Gene-Morales, J.; Saez-Berlanga, Á.; Bermudez, M.; Flandez, J.; Fritz, N.B.; Colado, J.C. Incidence and prevalence of injuries in futsal: A systematic review of the literature. J. Hum. Sport Exerc. 2021, 16, 1467–1480. [Google Scholar]
  47. Oliveira, C.C.; Ferreira, D.; Caetano, C.; Granja, D.; Pinto, R.; Mendes, B.; Sousa, M. Nutrition and supplementation in soccer. Sports 2017, 5, 28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Ijerph 20 00579 g001 550
Figure 1. Rate of perceived exertion (RPE) values.
Figure 1. Rate of perceived exertion (RPE) values.
Ijerph 20 00579 g001
Table
Table 1. Test–retest reliability of the variables.
Table 1. Test–retest reliability of the variables.
ICC (95% CI)SEMCV (%)
Rate of perceived exertion0.90 (0.87–0.94)1.371.85
Total load0.87 (0.79–0.89)2.372.15
Mean load0.90 (0.83–0.92)3.281.53
Monotony index0.88 (0.82–0.90)2.782.16
Total mood disturbance0.91 (0.82–0.93)3.492.55
Hooper index0.86 (0.78–0.89)2.473.17
ICC: intraclass correlation coefficient; CI: confidence interval; SEM: standard error of measurement; CV: coefficient of variation.
Table
Table 2. Mean, standard deviation (Std. Deviation), and 95% confidence interval (CI) of the dependent variables. Additionally, the significance of the differences between participating in one and two games per week in elite soccer players.
Table 2. Mean, standard deviation (Std. Deviation), and 95% confidence interval (CI) of the dependent variables. Additionally, the significance of the differences between participating in one and two games per week in elite soccer players.
VariablesMeanStd. Deviation95% CIp-ValueCohen’s Dunb
LowerUpper
RPE1 game/week3.620.393.403.85<0.001 *11.04
(large)
2 games/week7.730.247.597.88
Total load1 game/week1543.97287.511377.971709.980.0960.48
(small)
2 games/week1829.91529.831523.992135.83
Mean load1 game/week578.7153.33547.92609.510.0640.41
(small)
2 games/week614.5772.74572.57656.57
Monotony index1 game/week2.500.762.062.940.5870.15
(small)
2 games/week2.710.912.193.24
Total mood disturbance1 game/week45.4213.2537.7753.060.1010.36
(small)
2 games/week48.8813.4841.1056.66
Hooper index1 game/week10.481.709.5211.460.1370.31
(small)
2 games/week11.001.5510.1011.90
Injury rate1 game/week0.570.650.200.940.0590.56
(moderate)
2 games/week0.210.430.030.46
* Indicates a significant level on p < 0.05.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Sioud, R.; Hammami, R.; Gene-Morales, J.; Juesas, A.; Colado, J.C.; van den Tillaar, R. Effects of Game Weekly Frequency on Subjective Training Load, Wellness, and Injury Rate in Male Elite Soccer Players. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2023, 20, 579. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20010579

AMA Style

Sioud R, Hammami R, Gene-Morales J, Juesas A, Colado JC, van den Tillaar R. Effects of Game Weekly Frequency on Subjective Training Load, Wellness, and Injury Rate in Male Elite Soccer Players. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2023; 20(1):579. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20010579

Chicago/Turabian Style

Sioud, Rim, Raouf Hammami, Javier Gene-Morales, Alvaro Juesas, Juan C. Colado, and Roland van den Tillaar. 2023. "Effects of Game Weekly Frequency on Subjective Training Load, Wellness, and Injury Rate in Male Elite Soccer Players" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 20, no. 1: 579. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20010579

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop