Comprehensive periodic health evaluations of 454 Norwegian Paralympic and Olympic athletes over 8 years: what did we learn?

OBJECTIVE: A periodic health evaluation (PHE) is a comprehensive and multidisciplinary investigation of athlete health widely used in elite sport, but its contents and benefits can be questioned. This study aimed to determine the prevalence of conditions identified by a PHE among Paralympic and Olympic athletes over four consecutive Games cycles from Rio de Janeiro 2016 to Beijing 2022 and to assess the benefits and potential pitfalls of a comprehensive PHE programme in detecting existing injuries, illnesses and other health issues. METHODS: We collected extensive health history and clinical examination data on elite athletes: medical history, ECG, blood pressure, blood samples, spirometry, musculoskeletal health, cognitive function, mental health and compliance with public health programmes. RESULTS: The final cohort included 87 Paralympic and 367 Olympic athletes, representing 565 PHE cycles. Musculoskeletal problems and unspecified pain, infections and allergies were the most frequent health issues. High blood pressure was the most prevalent cardiovascular finding, and vitamin D deficiency the most common laboratory abnormality. Most athletes complied with the public childhood vaccination programmes, but fewer with recommended cancer screening. Follow-up of health issues was variable. CONCLUSION: Our PHE programme identified musculoskeletal problems, infections, allergies, elevated blood pressure and vitamin D deficiency as common health conditions. Longitudinal follow-up of health conditions identified during screening and improved compliance with public health and cancer screening programmes is needed to determine the true benefits of athlete care prompted by the PHE.

Injury and illness among Norwegian Olympic athletes during preparation for five consecutive Summer and Winter Games.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the patterns of health problems among Norwegian Olympic candidates during their preparations for five consecutive Olympic Games (London 2012, Sochi 2014, Rio de Janeiro 2016, PyeongChang 2018 and Tokyo 2020). METHODS: This was a descriptive epidemiological study using the Oslo Sports Trauma Research Center Questionnaire on Health Problems to collect data on all self-reported health problems from Norwegian Olympic candidate athletes for 12-18 months prior to each Olympic Games. Team physicians and physiotherapists followed up the athlete reports, providing clinical care and classifying reported problems according to the International Olympic Committee 2020 consensus statement on methods for recording and reporting of epidemiological data on injury and illness in sport. RESULTS: Between 2011 and 2020, 533 athletes were included in the Norwegian Olympic team monitoring programme, with a 78% response to the weekly questionnaire. During this time, athletes reported 2922 health problems, including 1409 illnesses (48%), 886 overuse injuries (repetitive mechanism, 30%) and 627 acute injuries (traumatic mechanism, 21%). Diagnostic codes were recorded for 2829 (97%) of health problems. Athletes reported, on average, 5.9 new health problems per year (95% CI: 5.6 to 6.1), including 1.3 acute injuries (CI: 1.2 to 1.4), 1.7 overuse injuries (CI: 1.6 to 1.9) and 2.9 illnesses (CI: 2.7 to 3.0). Each year, female and male athletes lost an average of 40 and 26 days of training and competition due to health problems, respectively. The diagnoses with the highest health burden were anterior cruciate ligament rupture, respiratory infection, lumbar pain and patellar tendinopathy. CONCLUSION: The injury burden was particularly high among female athletes and in team sports, whereas endurance sports had the greatest burden of illness. Our data provide a compelling argument for prioritising medical care and investing in prevention programmes not just during the Olympic Games, but also the preparation period.

Illness and injury among Norwegian Para athletes over five consecutive Paralympic Summer and Winter Games cycles: prevailing high illness burden on the road from 2012 to 2020.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the illness and injury pattern of Norwegian Para athletes over five consecutive Paralympic Summer and Winter Games cycles and to identify which health problems should be targeted in risk management plans with respect to impairment types. METHODS: We monitored athletes from 12 to 18 months prior to each Game using a weekly online questionnaire (Oslo Sports Trauma Research Center-H2 (OSTRC-H2)). We asked them to report all health problems they had experienced in the preceding 7 days, irrespective of their consequences on their sports participation or performance and whether they had sought medical attention. RESULTS: Between 2011 and 2020, 94 candidate athletes were included in this monitoring programme and prepared to represent Norway; of these, 66 (71%) were finally selected for multiple Paralympic Games. The overall response rate to the weekly questionnaires was 87%. At any given time during the five observation cycles, 37% of the athletes (95% CI 36% to 38%) reported having at least one health problem. Athletes with neurological impairments (n=51) lost 10 days per year due to respiratory problems (95% CI 9 to 11) compared with 9 days (8-10) among those with musculoskeletal impairments (n=37). Gastrointestinal problems caused a time loss of on average 4 days per year in athletes with neurological impairments versus 1 day in athletes with musculoskeletal impairments (mean difference 2.7 days, 2.1-3.3). Musculoskeletal injuries generated a high burden for both athlete groups, in particular, to the elbow, shoulder and lumbosacral regions. CONCLUSION: At any given time, nearly two out of five elite Norwegian Para athletes reported at least one health problem. Respiratory tract and other infections; gastrointestinal problems, injuries to the shoulder, elbow and lumbosacral regions represented the greatest health burden. Our findings can help guide the allocation of clinical resources, which should include a broad network of medical specialists, together with dieticians and physiotherapists, to meet the health challenges in Para athletes.

Methods, challenges and benefits of a health monitoring programme for Norwegian Olympic and Paralympic athletes: the road from London 2012 to Tokyo 2020.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the implementation of a health monitoring programme for Norwegian Paralympic and Olympic candidates over five consecutive Olympic and Paralympic Games cycles (London 2012, Sochi 2014, Rio de Janeiro 2016, PyeongChang 2018 and Tokyo 2020). METHODS: Athletes were monitored for 12-18 months preparing for the games using a weekly online questionnaire (OSTRC-H2) with follow-up by physicians and physiotherapists, who provided clinical care and classified reported problems. RESULTS: Between 2011 and 2020, 533 Olympic and 95 Paralympic athletes were included in the monitoring programme, with an overall response of 79% to the weekly questionnaire and a total observation period of 30 826 athlete weeks. During this time, 3770 health problems were reported, with a diagnosis rate of 97%. The average prevalence of health problems at any given time was 32% among Olympic athletes and 37% among Paralympic athletes. Acute traumatic injuries represented the greatest burden for Olympic team sport athletes, and illnesses represented the greatest burden for Olympic endurance and Paralympic athletes. On average, Olympic athletes lost 27 days and Paralympic athletes lost 33 days of training per year due to health problems. CONCLUSION: Conducting long-term health monitoring of Olympic and Paralympic athletes is challenging, particularly because athletes travel frequently and often relate to many medical providers. This programme has been implemented and improved within Team Norway for five Olympic and Paralympic cycles and during this time we believe it has helped protect our athletes' health.

A strength-oriented exercise session required more recovery time than a power-oriented exercise session with equal work.

The present randomized cross-over controlled study aimed to compare the rate of recovery from a strength-oriented exercise session vs. a power-oriented session with equal work. Sixteen strength-trained individuals conducted one strength-oriented session (five repetitions maximum (RM)) and one power-oriented session (50% of 5RM) in randomized order. Squat jump (SJ), countermovement jump (CMJ), 20-m sprint, and squat and bench press peak power and estimated 1RMs were combined with measures of rate of perceived exertion (RPE) and perceived recovery status (PRS), before, immediately after and 24 and 48 h after exercise. Both sessions induced trivial to moderate performance decrements in all variables. Small reductions in CMJ height were observed immediately after both the strength-oriented session (7 ± 6%) and power-oriented session (5 ± 5%). Between 24 and 48 h after both sessions CMJ and SJ heights and 20 m sprint were back to baseline. However, in contrast to the power-oriented session, recovery was not complete 48 h after the strength-oriented session, as indicated by greater impairments in CMJ eccentric and concentric peak forces, SJ rate of force development (RFD) and squat peak power. In agreement with the objective performance measurements, RPE and PRS ratings demonstrated that the strength-oriented session was experienced more strenuous than the power-oriented session. However, these subjective measurements agreed poorly with performance measurements at the individual level. In conclusion, we observed a larger degree of neuromuscular impairment and longer recovery times after a strength-oriented session than after a power-oriented session with equal total work, measured by both objective and subjective assessments. Nonetheless, most differences were small or trivial after either session. It appears necessary to combine several tests and within-test analyses (e.g., CMJ height, power and force) to reveal such differences. Objective and subjective assessments of fatigue and recovery cannot be used interchangeably; rather they should be combined to give a meaningful status for an individual in the days after a resistance exercise session.

Ethanol does not delay muscle recovery but decreases testosterone/cortisol ratio.

PURPOSE: This study investigated the effects of ethanol consumption on recovery from traditional resistance exercise in recreationally trained individuals. METHODS: Nine recreationally trained volunteers (eight males and one female, 26 ± 4 yr, 81 ± 4 kg) conducted four resistance exercise sessions and consumed a low (0.6 (females) and 0.7 (males) g · kg(-1) body mass) or a high dose (1.2 or 1.4 g · kg(-1) body mass) of ethanol 1-2.5 h after exercise on two occasions. The first session was for familiarization with the tests and exercises and was performed without ethanol consumption. As a control trial, alcohol-free drinks were consumed after the exercise session. The sequence of trials, with low and high ethanol doses and alcohol-free drinks (control), was randomized. Maximal voluntary contractions (MVC) (knee extension), electrically stimulated contractions (knee extension), squat jumps, and hand grip strength were assessed 10-15 min and 12 and 24 h after the ethanol/placebo drinks. In addition to a baseline sample, blood was collected 1, 12, and 24 h after the ethanol/placebo drinks. The exercise session comprised 4 × 8 repetition maximum of squats, leg presses, and knee extensions. RESULTS: MVC were reduced by 13%-15% immediately after the exercise sessions (P < 0.01). MVC, electrically stimulated force, and squat jump performance were recovered 24 h after ethanol drinks. MVC was not fully recovered at 24 h in the control trial. Compared with those in the control, cortisol increased and the free testosterone/cortisol ratio were reduced after the high ethanol dose (P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Neither a low nor a high dose of ethanol adversely affected recovery of muscle function after resistance exercise in recreationally strength-trained individuals. However, the increased cortisol levels and reduced testosterone/cortisol ratio after the high ethanol dose could translate into long-term negative effects.