Introduction: Recent original research and meta-analyses suggest that acute caffeine supplementation improves exercise performance in team-sport athletes (TSA). Nonetheless, most of the studies testing the effects of caffeine on TSA included samples of male athletes, and there is no meta-analysis of the performance-enhancing effects of caffeine on female TSA. The aim of the present study was to synthesize the existing literature regarding the effect of caffeine supplementation on physical performance in adult female TSA. Methods: A search was performed in Pubmed/Medline, SPORTDiscus and Scopus. The search was performed from the inception of indexing until 1 September 2021. Crossover randomized controlled trials (RCT) assessing the effects of oral caffeine intake on several aspects of performance in female TSA were selected. The methodological quality and risk of bias were assessed for individual studies using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database scale (PEDro) and the RoB 2 tool. A random-effects meta-analysis of standardized mean differences (SMD) was performed for several performance variables. Results: The search retrieved 18 articles that fulfilled the inclusion/exclusion criteria. Overall, most of the studies were of excellent quality with a low risk of bias. The meta-analysis results showed that caffeine increased performance in specific team-sport skills (SMD: 0.384, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.077–0.691), countermovement jump (SMD: 0.208, CI: 0.079–0.337), total body impacts (SMD: 0.488; 95% CI: 0.050, 0.927) and handgrip strength (SMD: 0.395, CI: 0.126–0.665). No effects were found on the ratings of perceived exertion, squat jumps, agility, repeated sprint ability or agility tests performed after fatigue. Conclusions: The results of the meta-analysis revealed that acute caffeine intake was effective in increasing some aspects of team-sports performance in women athletes. Hence, caffeine could be considered as a supplementation strategy for female athletes competing in team sports.

Background: Advanced footwear technology improves average running economy compared with racing flats in sub-elite athletes. However, not all athletes benefit as performance changes vary from a 10% drawback to a 14% improvement. The main beneficiaries from such technologies, world-class athletes, have only been analyzed using race times. Objective: The aim of this study was to measure running economy on a laboratory treadmill in advanced footwear technology compared to a traditional racing flat in world-class Kenyan (mean half-marathon time: 59:30 min:s) versus European amateur runners. Methods: Seven world-class Kenyan and seven amateur European male runners completed a maximal oxygen uptake assessment and submaximal steady-state running economy trials in three different models of advanced footwear technology and a racing flat. To confirm our results and better understand the overall effect of new technology in running shoes, we conducted a systematic search and meta-analysis. Results: Laboratory results revealed large variability in both world-class Kenyan road runners, which ranged from a 11.3% drawback to a 11.4% benefit, and amateur Europeans, which ranged from a 9.7% benefit to a 1.1% drawback in running economy of advanced footwear technology compared to a flat. The post-hoc meta-analysis revealed an overall significant medium benefit of advanced footwear technology on running economy compared with traditional flats. Conclusions: Variability of advanced footwear technology performance appears in both world-class and amateur runners, suggesting further testing should examine such variability to ensure validity of results and explain the cause as a more personalized approach to shoe selection might be necessary for optimal benefit.

A growing number of companies are developing or using wearable sensor technologies that can monitor, analyse and transmit data from humans in real time that can be used by the sporting, biomedical and media industries. To explore this phenomenon, we describe and review two high-profile sporting events where innovations in wearable technologies were trialled: the Tokyo 2020 Summer Olympic Games (Tokyo 2020, Japan) and the 2022 adidas Road to Records (Germany). These two major sporting events were the first time academic and industry partners came together to implement real-time wearable solutions during major competition, to protect the health of athletes competing in hot and humid environments, as well as to better understand how these metrics can be used moving forwards. Despite the undoubted benefits of such wearables, there are well-founded concerns regarding their use including: (1) limited evidence quantifying the potential beneficial effects of analysing specific parameters, (2) the quality of hardware and provided data, (3) information overload, (4) data security and (5) exaggerated marketing claims. Employment and sporting rules and regulations also need to evolve to facilitate the use of wearable devices. There is also the potential to obtain real-time data that will oblige medical personnel to make crucial decisions around whether their athletes should continue competing or withdraw for health reasons. To protect athletes, the urgent need is to overcome these ethical/data protection concerns and develop wearable technologies that are backed by quality science. The fields of sport and exercise science and medicine provide an excellent platform to understand the impact of wearable sensors on performance, wellness, health, and disease.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of the combination of resistance training (RT) and protein supplementation (PS), compared to RT alone or combined with a placebo (plS), in the improvement of muscle strength and physical performance. The search strategy in PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Web of Sciences databases found a total of 294 studies. Once inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied, 16 studies were included for the qualitative analysis. A total of 657 healthy elderly (>60 years) participants were analysed. Finally, 15 articles were included in the quantitative analysis with one being excluded due to issues with data availability. Upper-limb, lower-limb, and handgrip strength were the primary outcomes of the meta-analysis. The secondary outcomes, related to physical performance, were Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB), gait speed, and the five-chair-rise test (5CRT). The main results of the meta-analysis show no statistical differences for upper-limb (SMD: 0.56, 95% CI: −0.09, 1.21, p = 0.09, I2 = 68%), lower-limb (SMD: 0.00, 95% CI: −0.18, 0.18, p = 1.0, I2 = 11%), and handgrip strength (SMD: 0.03, 95% CI: −0.26, 0.32, p = 0.84, I2 = 0%) between the RT + PS and the RT alone (or combined with plS). Moreover, no statistical differences were found relating to physical performance. In view of these results, protein supplementation combined with RT does not provide additional benefits compared to RT alone or with plS in healthy elderly adults.

In this viewpoint we make specific recommendations that can assist and make the return to sport/exercise as safe as possible for all those impacted – from the recreational athlete to the elite athlete. We acknowledge that there are varying rules and regulations around the world, not to mention the varying philosophies and numerous schools of thought as it relates to return to sport/exercise and we have been cognisant of this in our recommendations. Despite the varying rules and circumstances around the world, we believe it is essential to provide some helpful and consistent guidance for return to training and sport for sport and exercise physicians around the world at this most difficult time. The present viewpoint provides practical and medical recommendations on the resumption to sport process.