Improving menstrual health literacy in sport.

Menstrual health represents a state of complete physical, mental, and social well-being in relation to a woman's menstrual cycle. From a health literacy perspective, knowledge acquisition and expertise are dependent upon the degree to which an individual can find, access, understand, critically analyse, and apply health information. Therefore, menstrual health literacy can be used to describe the state of knowledge acquisition and application specific to menstrual health-related issues. Menstrual health literacy is low among female athletes, their coaches, and practitioners, and few evidence-informed education or implementation strategies exist to improve menstrual health literacy in sport. Moreover, athletes seldom discuss their menstrual cycles or hormonal contraceptive use with their coaches, despite experiencing menstrual symptoms and/or disturbances and perceiving their menstrual cycles/hormonal contraceptive use to affect performance. Barriers to communication about menstrual cycle- and hormonal contraceptive-related topics include a perceived lack of knowledge among athletes, coaches, and practitioners, concerns about how conversations on these issues will affect interpersonal relationships, and a lack of formal and informal discussion forums. Whilst evidence relating to the effects of the menstrual cycle phase and hormonal contraceptive use on training and performance is currently limited, with existing studies often lacking methodological rigour, impactful steps can still be made to support female athletes. This cornerstone review highlights the current state of menstrual health literacy among athletes, coaches, and practitioners, and provides recommendations for improving menstrual health literacy in sport.

Factors affecting gross efficiency in cycling.

There is little standardization of how to measure cycling gross efficiency (GE). Therefore, the purposes of these studies were to evaluate the effect of: i) stage duration, ii) relative exercise intensity, iii) work capacity and iv) a prior maximal incremental test on GE. Trained subjects (n=28) performed incremental tests with stage durations of 1-, 3-, and 6-min to establish the effect of stage duration and relative exercise intensity on GE. The effect of work capacity was evaluated by correlating GE with peak power output (PPO). In different subjects (n=9), GE was measured at 50% PPO with and without a prior maximal incremental test. GE was similar in 3- and 6-min stages (19.7 ± 2.8% and 19.3 ± 2.0%), but significantly higher during 1-min stages (21.1 ± 2.7%), GE increased with relative exercise intensity, up to 50% PPO or the power output corresponding to the ventilatory threshold and then remained stable. No relationship between work capacity and GE was found. Prior maximal exercise had a small effect on GE measures; GE was lower after maximal exercise. In conclusion, GE can be determined robustly so long as steady state exercise is performed and RER ≤ 1.0.

Anaerobic capacity: effect of computational method.

Anaerobic capacity (AnC) can be estimated by subtracting VO (2) consumed from VO (2) demand, which can be estimated from multiple submaximal exercise bouts or by gross efficiency (GE), requiring one submaximal bout. This study compares AnC using the MAOD and GE method. The precision of estimated VO (2) demand and AnC, determined by MAOD using 3 power output - VO (2) regressions, based on VO (2) from min 8-10 (10 - Y), during min 4 without (4 - Y) and with forced y-intercept (4+Y), and from GE was evaluated by the 95% confidence interval (CI). Well-trained males (n=15) performed submaximal exercise tests to establish VO (2) demand with the MAOD and GE method. To determine AnC subjects completed a constant power output trial. The 3 MAOD procedures and GE method had no significant difference for VO (2) demand and AnC. The 4+Y MAOD procedure and GE method resulted in a smaller 95% CI of VO (2) demand and AnC than the 10 - Y ( P<0.05; P<0.01) and 4 - Y ( P<0.001; P<0.01) MAOD procedures. Therefore, the 4+Y MAOD procedure and GE method are preferred for estimating AnC, but as individual differences exist, they cannot be used interchangeably.