590 MEP063 – The balancing act of the young adult elite endurance runner: merging lifestyle, performance and injury prevention

AbstractBackground Strength and Conditioning (S (2) monitor S (3) establish factors affecting running participation; (4) explore runners' perspectives on injury prevention.Design Mixed methods, longitudinalSetting University Performance Programme Participants 17 (F = 10) elite endurance runners (age 20.4 ± 1.3 years). Intervention Twice weekly supervised S&C for 6 months.Main Outcome Measures Countermovement Jump (CMJ) body mass normalised concentric peak force (PF) and modified Reactive Strength Index (modRSI) were measured at 3 Time Points (TP): start (TP1), mid (TP2), end (TP3). Normalised isometric Plantar Flexion (isoPF) force was measured at TP1 and TP3. The Modified Oslo Sports Trauma Research Centre (OSTRC) Questionnaire was used to monitor factors affecting weekly running participation. Two focus groups were conducted to establish runner's perceptions on injury prevention.Results CMJ PF and modRSI were significantly greater at TP2 (PF: 2.39 ± 0.22 N, modRSI: 0.39 ± 0.07) compared to TP1 (PF: 2.18 ± 0.19 N, modRSI: 0.34 ± 0.11), but no other significant differences between TPs were found. There was no significant difference (p = 0.111) between isoPF between TP1 (2.84 ± 0.36 N) and TP3 (2.99 ± 0.46 N). Factors affecting participation in running were as likely affected by health and lifestyle factors as with RRI. Focus groups themes were (1) benefits of participating in regular S&C (2) uncertainties balancing training for performance enhancement without RRI (3) social/lifestyle factors (4) knowledge and experience.Conclusions Measurable strength gains occur within first 3 months S&C. Lifestyle, health and RRI should be taken into consideration equally during preventative interactions with runners. Load management versus performance gains remain a dilemma for managing RRI risk but runners perceive regular S&C provides resilience for running training consistency.