Inter- and Intra-Day Comparisons of Smartphone-Derived Heart Rate Variability across Resistance Training Overload and Taper Microcycles

Tyler D. Williams, Michael R. Esco, Michael V. Fedewa and Phillip A. Bishop
Additional contact information
Tyler D. Williams: Department of Kinesiology, Samford University, Birmingham, AL 35229, USA
Michael R. Esco: Department of Kinesiology, University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, AL 35487, USA
Michael V. Fedewa: Department of Kinesiology, University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, AL 35487, USA
Phillip A. Bishop: Department of Kinesiology, University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, AL 35487, USA

IJERPH, 2020, vol. 18, issue 1, 1-13

Abstract: The purposes of this study were: (1) to determine if smartphone-derived heart rate variability (HRV) could detect changes in training load during an overload microcycle and taper, and (2) to determine the reliability of HRV measured in the morning and measured immediately prior to the testing session. Twelve powerlifters (male = 10, female = 2) completed a 3-week resistance training program consisting of an introduction microcycle, overload microcycle, and taper. Using a validated smartphone application, daily measures of resting, ultra-short natural logarithm of root mean square of successive differences were recorded in the morning (LnRMSSD M ) and immediately before the test session (LnRMSSD T ) following baseline, post-overload, and post-taper testing. LnRMSSD M decreased from baseline (82.9 ± 13.0) to post-overload (75.0 ± 9.9, p = 0.019), while post-taper LnRMSSD M (81.9 ± 7.1) was not different from post-overload ( p = 0.056) or baseline ( p = 0.998). No differences in LnRMSSD T ( p < 0.05) were observed between baseline (78.3 ± 9.0), post-overload (74.4 ± 10.2), and post-taper (78.3 ± 8.0). LnRMSSD M and LnRMSSD T were strongly correlated at baseline (ICC = 0.71, p < 0.001) and post-overload (ICC = 0.65, p = 0.010), whereas there was no relationship at post-taper (ICC = 0.44, p = 0.054). Bland–Altman analyses suggest extremely wide limits of agreement (Bias ± 1.96 SD) between LnRMSSD M and LnRMSSD T at baseline (4.7 ± 15.2), post-overload (0.5 ± 16.9), and post-taper (3.7 ± 15.3). Smartphone-derived HRV, recorded upon waking, was sensitive to resistance training loads across an overload and taper microcycles in competitive strength athletes, whereas the HRV was taken immediately prior to the testing session was not.

Keywords: athlete monitoring; powerlifting; bench press; strength (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I I1 I3 Q Q5 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2020
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/1/177/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/1/177/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2020:i:1:p:177-:d:469803

Access Statistics for this article

IJERPH is currently edited by Ms. Jenna Liu

More articles in IJERPH from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().