ABSTRACT
Background: Studies examining the physiological consequences associated with deficits in energy availability (EA) for male athletes are sparse. Purpose: To examine male athlete triad components; low energy availability (LEA) with or without an eating disorder risk (ED), reproductive hormone [testosterone (T)], and bone mineral density (BMD) in endurance-trained male athletes during different training periods. Methods: A cross-sectional design with 14 participants (age: 26.4 ± 4.2 years; weight: 70.6 ± 6.4 kg; height: 179.5 ± 4.3 cm; BMI: 21.9 ± 1.8 kg/m2) were recruited from the local community. Two separate training weeks [low (LV) and high (HV) training volumes] were used to collect the following: 7-day dietary and exercise logs, and blood concentration of T. Anthropometric measurements was taken prior to data collection. A one-time BMD measure (after the training weeks) and VO2max-HR regressions were utilized to calculate EEE. Results: Overall, EA presented as 27.6 ± 10.7 kcal/kgFFM·d-1 with 35% (n = 5) of participants demonstrating increased risk for ED. Examining male triad components, 64.3% presented with LEA (≤ 30 kcal/kgFFM·d-1) while participants presented with T (1780.6 ± 1672.6 ng/dl) and BMD (1.31 ±.09 g/cm2) within normal reference ranges. No differences were found across the 2 training weeks for EI, with slight differences for EA and EEE. Twenty-five participants (89.3%) under-ingested CHO across both weeks, with no differences between weeks. Conclusion: Majority of endurance-trained male athletes presented with one compromised component of the triad (LEA with or without ED risk); however, long-term negative effects on T and BMD were not demonstrated. Over 60% of the participants presented with an EA ≤ 30 kcal/kgFFM·d-1, along with almost 90% not meeting CHO needs. These results suggest male endurance-trained athletes may be at risk to negative health outcomes similar to mechanistic behaviors related to EA with or without ED in female athletes.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Poor balance, lack of neuromuscular control, and movement ability are predictors of performance and injury risk in sports and physical activity participation. The Functional Movement Screen™ (FMS™) and lower quarter Y-Balance Test (YBT) have been used by clinicians to evaluate balance, functional symmetry, and static and dynamic movement patterns, yet little information exists regarding the relationship between the FMS™, YBT, and physical performance tests (e.g. vertical jump) within the high school population. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between the FMSTM, dynamic balance as measured by the YBT and physical performance tests (standing long jump, vertical jump, Pro Agility Test) in male and female high school athletes. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study. METHODS: Fifty-six high school athletes (28 females, 28 males; mean age 16.4 ± 0.1) who participated in organized team sports were tested. Participants performed the FMS™, YBT, and three physical performance tests (standing long jump, vertical jump, Pro Agility Test). RESULTS: Females outperformed males on the FMS™ and YBT, while males outperformed females on the performance tests. In both sexes, the composite FMSTM score was positively correlated with the left and composite YBT scores. Agility was negatively correlated with composite FMSTM in males (p < 0.05) and the left and composite YBT in females (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The FMSTM and YBT may evaluate similar underlying constructs in high school athletes, such as dynamic balance and lower extremity power. The results of this study demonstrate the utility of the FMS and YBT to relate multiple constructs of muscular power to an individual's ability to balance. Furthermore, establishing the need for the utilization and application of multiple field-based tests by sports medicine professionals and strength and conditioning coaches when evaluating an athlete's movement and physical performance capabilities. Utilization of multiple field-based tests may provide the first step for the development of injury prevention strategies and long-term athlete development programs. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2b.