Haemoglobin mass responses and performance outcomes among high-performance swimmers following a three-week Live-High, Train-High camp at 2,320m

Greater quantification and characterisation of training load (TL) throughout Live-High, Train-High (LHTH) altitude (ALT) training is required to identify periodisation strategies that may lead to physiological and performance improvements in swimmers. Purpose: This study aimed to examine the physiological responses and performance outcomes of fourteen high-performance swimmers (FINA points: 836.0 ± 35.1) following three-weeks of LHTH at 2,320m, while characterising the training load periodisation strategy adopted during the intervention. Methods: Haemoglobin (Hb) mass was measured pre-, seven- and fourteen-days post-ALT via CO rebreathing. Performance in each athlete’s primary event at national standard meets were converted to FINA points and compared from pre-to-post ALT. TL was quantified at sea level (SL) and ALT through session rating of perceived exertion (RPE), where duration of each session was multiplied by its RPE for each athlete, with all sessions totalled to give a weekly TL. Pre-to-post ALT changes were evaluated using repeated-measures ANOVA.Results: Hb mass increased significantly from 798±182g pre-ALT, to 828±187g at seven-days post (p=0.013) and 833±205g 14-days post-ALT (p=0.026). Weekly TL increased from SL (3179±638 au) during week one (4797±1349 au, p&lt;0.001) and week two (4373±967 au, p&lt;0.001), but not week three (3511±730 au, p=0.149). No evidence of improved SL swimming performance was identified. Conclusion: A periodisation strategy characterised by a sharp spike in TL followed by a slight de-load towards the end of a LHTH intervention led to improved physiological characteristics but no change in the competitive performance of high-performance swimmers.<br/

Research in Pediatric Residency: National Experience of Pediatric Chief Residents

Objective To determine factors associated with increased research productivity, satisfaction, and perceived barriers to research within residency from the experience of pediatric chief residents. Methods An online cross-sectional survey was administered to academic year 2014–15 chief residents. Topics assessed included program demographic characteristics, career intentions, research productivity, satisfaction with research training and opportunities, and research barriers. Chi-square and Fisher exact tests were used for descriptive statistics. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to determine factors associated with productivity and research satisfaction. Results The response rate was 63% (165 of 261). Half (82 of 165) were productive in research. Most were satisfied with their quality of research training (55%; 90 of 165) and research opportunities (69%; 114 of 165). Chiefs reporting interest in research were 5 times more likely to be productive than those who did not (odds ratio [OR] = 5.2; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.3–11.8). Productive chiefs were more likely to report including research time in future careers (P = .003). Most (83%; 137 of 165) thought their programs were supportive of resident research, but lack of time was frequently cited as a major barrier. Those satisfied with research opportunities were less likely to find lack of training (OR = 0.3; 95% CI, 0.1–0.7) or faculty mentorship (OR = 0.2; 95% CI, 0.0–0.9) as a major barrier. Conclusions Pediatric chief resident interest in research is strongly associated with research productivity during residency, and research productivity is strongly associated with career plans including research time. By cultivating research interest through faculty mentorship, research training, and dedicated time, pediatric residency programs might help foster early research success and, potentially lead to continued engagement with research in trainees' future careers