Training monitoring methods used in the field by coaches and practitioners: A systematic review

Athletes’ optimal training progression can be supported by reliable and valid monitoring tools. This systematic review aims to investigate tools that have been most frequently in the field used by coaches and practitioners of sports of any level. PyscINFO, Scopus, MEDLINE and SPORTDiscus databases were searched. Search terms used include: overreaching, overtraining, recover, fatigue, overload, train; monitor, athlete monitor, train monitor and coach, sport scientist, or performance coach. From the 1982 search results retrieved, seven articles met the inclusion criteria. The inclusion criteria required articles to be descriptive or observational studies on the training monitoring of athletes, be peer-reviewed, and in English. Physiological measures (e.g. heart rate) and measures of performance and workload (e.g. tests including sprints; global positioning system variables) were most frequently used. Psychological self-reported questionnaires, such as ratings of perceived exertion and mood inventories, were also frequently used in the field. The results indicated that only a few biochemical measures (blood and urine analysis) were regularly used outside of a laboratory. Easily implemented measurements were more commonly used than more advanced ones, indicating that the tools valued by practitioners are those that are time efficient, easy to administer and are non-fatiguing and non-invasive. Knowing what tools are currently used in the field is the first step in knowing what is practical and usable for coaches in the field, where after coaches and practitioners collaborating with sport scientists can develop and implement tools that are both useable and easily administered.