Randomized trial investigates hormonal effects on performance in women across menstrual cycle phases, suggesting potential optimization strategies.
Purpose Women remain underrepresented in research due to the menstrual cycle’s complxity. Most studies use outdated methods, limiting insights into menstrual cycle effects on performance. Therefore, there is a need to expand the body of knowledge using modern and robust methodologies. The aim of this study was to investigate the anaerobic and neuromuscular performance of women (18–35y) across different ovarian cycle phases and their influence on performance. The protocol was conducted in three cycle phases: early follicular (EF), late follicular (LF), and mid-luteal (ML) phase. Methods Sixteen volunteers underwent anthropometric measurements, maximal isometric strength test with rate of force development (RFD), horizontal jump (HJ), countermovement jump (CMJ), squat jump (SJ), and the running-based anaerobic sprint test (RAST). Results RFD and resultant force showed better performance in LF compared to ML ( p = 0.015, ΔRFD:12.61%; p = 0.030, ΔResultant Force:12,17%); CMJ and HJ performed better in ML compared to EF ( p = 0.002, ΔCMJ:5.7%; p = 0.001, ΔHJ:3.2%). RAST and anthropometric measurements showed no differences between phases. Conclusion It is suggested that fluctuations in sex hormones may influence neuromuscular performance, while metabolic-related aspects appear to remain stable. Recognizing that neuromuscular demands respond differently to hormonal fluctuations may help reduce performance variability and optimize outcomes by leveraging specific menstrual phases. However, observed differences were small, within measurement error, and effect sizes were trivial to small. Thus, findings do not support meaningful performance variations and should not guide training prescription in isolation. Future research should investigate subjective symptoms and their impact on performance, even under similar hormonal profiles.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Pavan et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: