Objective: Our objective was to explore the training-related knowledge, beliefs, and practices of athletes and the influence of lockdowns in response to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Methods: Athletes (n = 12,526, comprising 13% world class, 21% international, 36% national, 24% state, and 6% recreational) completed an online survey that was available from 17 May to 5 July 2020 and explored their training behaviors (training knowledge, beliefs/attitudes, and practices), including specific questions on their training intensity, frequency, and session duration before and during lockdown (March–June 2020). Results: Overall, 85% of athletes wanted to “maintain training,” and 79% disagreed with the statement that it is “okay to not train during lockdown,” with a greater prevalence for both in higher-level athletes. In total, 60% of athletes considered “coaching by correspondence (remote coaching)” to be sufficient (highest amongst world-class athletes). During lockdown, < 40% were able to maintain sport-specific training (e.g., long endurance [39%], interval training [35%], weightlifting [33%], plyometric exercise [30%]) at pre-lockdown levels (higher among world-class, international, and national athletes), with most (83%) training for “general fitness and health maintenance” during lockdown. Athletes trained alone (80%) and focused on bodyweight (65%) and cardiovascular (59%) exercise/training during lockdown. Compared with before lockdown, most athletes reported reduced training frequency (from between five and seven sessions per week to four or fewer), shorter training sessions (from ≥ 60 to < 60 min), and lower sport-specific intensity (~ 38% reduction), irrespective of athlete classification. Conclusions: COVID-19-related lockdowns saw marked reductions in athletic training specificity, intensity, frequency, and duration, with notable within-sample differences (by athlete classification). Higher classification athletes had the strongest desire to “maintain” training and the greatest opposition to “not training” during lockdowns. These higher classification athletes retained training specificity to a greater degree than others, probably because of preferential access to limited training resources. More higher classification athletes considered “coaching by correspondence” as sufficient than did lower classification athletes. These lockdown-mediated changes in training were not conducive to maintenance or progression of athletes’ physical capacities and were also likely detrimental to athletes’ mental health. These data can be used by policy makers, athletes, and their multidisciplinary teams to modulate their practice, with a degree of individualization, in the current and continued pandemic-related scenario. Furthermore, the data may drive training-related educational resources for athletes and their multidisciplinary teams. Such upskilling would provide athletes with evidence to inform their training modifications in response to germane situations (e.g., COVID related, injury, and illness).

Korkmaz, E, Dönmez, G, Uzuner, K, BabayevaŞerife Şeyma Torgutalp, N, and Özçakar, L. Effects of blood flow restriction training on muscle strength and architecture. J Strength Cond Res 36(5): 1396–1403, 2022—The aim of this study was to compare the effect of the traditional resistance (RES) training and low-intensity resistance training with blood flow restriction (BFR) protocols on quadriceps and hamstring muscle strength, and rectus femoris (RF) and vastus lateralis architecture, in youth team soccer players. Twenty-three young trained soccer team players were divided into 2 groups: the RES group that practiced traditional high-intensity resistance training (80% 1 repetition maximum [1RM], 4 sets, 12 rep.) (n = 12) and the BFR group that performed low-intensity resistance exercise with BFR (30% 1RM, 4 sets, 30-15-15-15 rep.) (n = 11)—unilateral knee extension exercise—twice a week for 6 weeks. Muscle strength (isokinetic concentric peak torque of the quadriceps and hamstring muscles) and ultrasonographic parameters (muscle thickness, pennation angle, and fascicle length) were assessed. Bilateral knee flexor and extensor strength was increased in both groups compared with pre-exercise. The increase in dominant side extensor muscle strength (60°·s⁻¹ p = 0.02, = 0.256, 180°·s⁻¹ p = 0.019, = 0.271) and RF thickness (p = 0.002, = 0.361) was statistically higher in the BFR group than in the RES group. These findings support that occlusion training can provide better benefits than traditional strength training to improve muscle hypertrophy. In addition, the novelty of our study is that BFR training may affect the muscle structure measured by ultrasonography.

Objective: To describe a clinical treatment algorithm for posterior ankle impingement (PAI) syndrome in professional football players. Material and methods: A case series of 26 elite professional football players diagnosed and treated for posterior ankle impingement syndrome were included for the study. All of the athletes received conservative treatment with physical therapy modalities initially. If the first line medical treatment and rehabilitation was ineffective to alleviate the symptoms, ultrasound-guided corticosteroid injection was proposed and thereafter the patients underwent posterior ankle arthroscopy if the complaints are still unresolved. The pain scores (AOFAS, VAS), and time to return to play were the main outcome measures. Results: The complaints of 18 (69.2%) players were subsided with non-surgical treatment whereas three of acute cases and five of the chronic cases did not respond to medical treatment and arthroscopic surgery was performed for eight athletes. Eighteen players returned to training for a mean time of 36.3 days (24e42 days) after conservative treatment. The patients who underwent arthroscopic surgery returned to training for a mean time of 49.8 days (42e56 days) after the surgery. All athletes returned to their previous level of competition after treatment without any complications or recurrence in a mean follow-up 36.5 months (19e77 months). Conclusion: Non-surgical treatment modalities were effective in 2/3 of posterior ankle impingement syndrome in elite football players. On the other hand, posterior ankle arthroscopy is safe and effective treatment option for posterior ankle impingement syndrome if the conservative treatment fails. Level of evidence: Level IV, Therapeutic study

Objectives: The coronavirus outbreak caused significant changes in football around the world, such as the suspension of leagues and home isolation of players, etc. The main purpose of the present study was to assess the psychological impacts of lockdown and similar restrictions on professional football players during the coronavirus pandemic. Materials and methods: The players from 36 professional football teams (n = 977) among Turkish Super League and First League teams were invited to complete a questionnaire including the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D), Impact of Event Scale-Revised Scores (IES-R) and short form of International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ). Results: The online survey was completed by 237 players (24.3%). The mean number of self-quarantine day of participants was 26.9 ± 6.2 days. The median CES-D Scale and IES-R scores were 6.0 (min:0, max:42) and 23.0 (min:0, max:59), respectively. IPAQ scores of the players showed that four-fifths of the players still maintain high physical activity levels. There were negative, very weak and significant correlations between CES-D score and being married (r = −0.146, p = 0.024), as well as between CES-D score and IPAQ-Walking (r = −0.189, p = 0.004). A significant positive very weak correlation was observed between CES-D score and self-quarantine days (r = 0.148, p = 0.024). IPAQ-Walking was an independent predictor of CES-D. Conclusion: These findings support that maintaining regular physical activity and routinely exercising in a safe home environment is one of the most important strategies to ensure healthy mental state.

The COVID-19 lockdown challenged the training options of athletes worldwide, including players from the most popular sport globally, football/soccer. Purpose: The authors explored the training practices of football players worldwide during the COVID-19 lockdown. Methods: Football players (N = 2482, 30% professional, 22% semipro, and 48% amateur) completed an online survey (May–July 2020) on their training practices before versus during lockdown (March–June 2020). Questions were related to training frequency and session duration, as well as training knowledge and attitudes. Results: Before lockdown, more professional (87%) than semipro (67%) and amateur (65%) players trained ≥5 sessions/wk, but this proportion decreased during the lockdown to 55%, 35%, and 42%, respectively. Players (80%–87%) trained ≥60 minutes before lockdown, but this proportion decreased to 45% in professionals, 43% in amateurs, and 36% in semipros during lockdown. At home, more than two-thirds of players had training space (73%) and equipment (66%) for cardiorespiratory training, while availability of equipment for technical and strength training was <50% during lockdown. Interactions between coach/trainer and player were more frequent (ie, daily) among professional (27%) than amateur (11%) and semipro (17%) players. Training load monitoring, albeit limited, was mostly performed by fitness coaches, more so with professionals (35%) than amateurs (13%) and semipros (17%). The players’ training knowledge and attitudes/beliefs toward training were relatively modest (50%–59%). Conclusion: COVID-19 lockdown negatively affected training practices of football players worldwide, especially amateurs and semipros, for example, in training frequency, duration, intensity, technical, recovery, and other fitness training and coaching-related aspects. During lockdown-like situations, players should be monitored closely and provided appropriate support to facilitate their training.