Background Monitoring athlete well-being is essential to guide training and to detect any progression towards negative health outcomes and associated poor performance. Objective (performance, physiological, biochemical) and subjective measures are all options for athlete monitoring. Objective We systematically reviewed objective and subjective measures of athlete well-being. Objective measures, including those taken at rest (eg, blood markers, heart rate) and during exercise (eg, oxygen consumption, heart rate response), were compared against subjective measures (eg, mood, perceived stress). All measures were also evaluated for their response to acute and chronic training load. Methods The databases Academic search complete, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, SPORTDiscus and PubMed were searched in May 2014. Fifty-six original studies reported concurrent subjective and objective measures of athlete well-being. The quality and strength of findings of each study were evaluated to determine overall levels of evidence. Results Subjective and objective measures of athlete well-being generally did not correlate. Subjective measures reflected acute and chronic training loads with superior sensitivity and consistency than objective measures. Subjective well-being was typically impaired with an acute increase in training load, and also with chronic training, while an acute decrease in training load improved subjective well-being. Summary This review provides further support for practitioners to use subjective measures to monitor changes in athlete well-being in response to training. Subjective measures may stand alone, or be incorporated into a mixed methods approach to athlete monitoring, as is current practice in many sport settings.

We report the initial validation of a multi‐component assessment model for monitoring training distress among athletes. The model combines measures of mood disturbance with measures of perceived stress and symptom intensity. Altogether, 492 athletes completed the 10‐item Perceived Stress Scale (PSS‐10; Cohen et al., 1983), the 24‐item Brunel Mood Scale (BRUMS; Terry et al., 2003), and a checklist of 19 symptoms associated with acute overtraining (Fry et al., 1994). Six training distress factors were identified by an exploratory factor analysis: “depressed mood”, “perceived vigour”, “physical symptoms”, “sleep disturbance”, “perceived stress”, and “general fatigue”. Comparisons of group means of these factors with a previously validated inventory were consistent with theoretical predictions and provided evidence of construct validity. Internal consistency of the subscales was also confirmed, with Cronbach alphas ranging from 0.72 to 0.86. Together, these findings suggest that this multi‐component model provides a sound conceptual basis for the assessment of training distress among athletes.

It has been purported that inflammatory cytokines may be responsible for the aetiology of overtraining. The aim of the present study was to investigate the relationship between self-reported measures of overtraining and inflammatory cytokines. Eight elite male rowers were monitored in their natural training environment for 8 weeks prior to the 2007 Rowing World Championships. During this period of intense endurance training, self-report measures of overtraining and inflammatory cytokines (Interleukin (IL)-1β, IL-6, IL-8, IL-10, IL-12p70, and Tumor Necrosis Factor (TNF)-α) were assessed fortnightly. Consistent with previous findings, proinflammatory cytokines IL-1β and TNF-α were significantly associated (p ≤ 0.05) with measures of depressed mood, sleep disturbances, and stress. Similarly, IL-6 was significantly associated (p ≤ 0.01) with measures of depressed mood, sleep disturbances, and fatigue. These results are consistent with previous hypotheses describing how overtraining may be caused by excessive cytokine release, and lend further support for a cytokine hypothesis of overtraining.

Adaptation to military operational stress is a complex physiological response that calls upon the sympathetic nervous system (SNS), hypothalamic pituitary adrenal (HPA) axis and immune system, to create a delicate balance between anabolism and catabolism and meet the demands of an ever‐changing environment. As such, resilience, the ability to withstand and overcome the negative impact of stress on military performance, is likely grounded in an appropriate biological adaptation to encountered stressors. Neuroendocrine [i.e. cortisol, epinephrine (EPI), norepinephrine (NE), neuropeptide‐Y (NPY), and brain derived neurotropic factor (BDNF)], inflammatory [i.e. interleukin 6 (IL‐6), IL‐1β, IL‐4, IL‐10 and tumour necrosis factor (TNF)‐α], as well as growth and anabolic [i.e. insulin‐like growth factor‐I (IGF‐I), testosterone, and dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA)] biomarkers independently and interactively function in stress adaptations that are associated with a soldier's physical and psychological performance. In this narrative review, we detail biomarkers across neuroendocrine, inflammatory, and growth stimulating domains to better elucidate the biological basis of a resilient soldier. The findings from the reviewed studies indicate that military readiness and resiliency may be enhanced through better homeostatic control, better regulated inflammatory responses, and balanced anabolic/catabolic processes. It is unlikely that one class of biomarkers is better for assessing physiological resilience. Therefore, a biomarker panel that can account for appropriate balance across these domains may be superior in developing monitoring frameworks. Real‐time physiological monitoring to assess biomarkers associated with resilience will be possible pending more sophisticated technologies and provide a field‐expedient application for early identification and intervention of at‐risk soldiers to improve military resiliency.

Background: Awareness of the cumulative stress placed on first responders and tactical operators is required to manage acute fatigue, which can impair occupational performance, and may precipitate negative chronic health outcomes. The aim of this review was to investigate the utility of heart rate variability (HRV) to monitor stress and allostatic load among these populations.Methods: A systematic search of Academic Search Complete, MEDLINE complete, PsycINFO, SPORTDiscus and Scopus databases was conducted. Eligibility criteria: original peer reviewed research articles, written in English, published between 1985 and 2020, using human participants employed as a first responder or tactical operator, free from any psychological disorder.Results: Of the 360 articles screened, 60 met the inclusion criteria and were included for full text assessment. Articles were classified based on single or repeated stressor exposure and the time of HRV assessment (baseline, during stressor, post stressor). Singular stressful events elicited a reduction in HRV from baseline to during the event. Stressors of greater magnitude reduced HRV for extended durations post stressor. Lower resting HRV was associated with lower situational awareness and impaired decision-making performance in marksmanship and navigation tasks. There were insufficient studies to evaluate the utility of HRV to assess allostatic load in repeated stressor contexts.Conclusion: A reduction in HRV occurred in response to acute physical and cognitive occupational stressors. A slower rate of recovery of HRV after the completion of acute occupational stressors appears to occur in response to stressors of greater magnitude. The association between lower HRV and lower decision-making performance poses as a useful tool but further investigations on within subject changes between these factors and their relationship is required. More research is required to investigate the suitability of HRV as a measure of allostatic load in repeated stress exposures for fatigue management in first responder and tactical operators.