Risk and prevalence of Relative Energy Deficiency in Sport (REDs) among professional female football players

Marcus S. Dasa, Oddgeir Friborg, Morten Kristoffersen, Gunn Pettersen, Jorn V. Sagen, Monica Klungland Torstveit, Jorunn Sundgot-Borgen, Jan H. Rosenvinge
{"title":"Risk and prevalence of Relative Energy Deficiency in Sport (REDs) among professional female football players","authors":"Marcus S. Dasa,&nbsp;Oddgeir Friborg,&nbsp;Morten Kristoffersen,&nbsp;Gunn Pettersen,&nbsp;Jorn V. Sagen,&nbsp;Monica Klungland Torstveit,&nbsp;Jorunn Sundgot-Borgen,&nbsp;Jan H. Rosenvinge","doi":"10.1002/ejsc.12129","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>A high prevalence of low energy availability (LEA) has been reported in female football players. This is of concern as problematic LEA may evolve into a syndromic pattern known as relative energy deficiency in sport (REDs). Given the difficulties in accurately assessing LEA, our study shifts emphasis to measurable indicators of REDs, serving as proxies for health detriments caused by LEA. The present cross-sectional study aimed to quantify the risk of REDs and to assess the prevalence of indicators indicative of the syndrome. 60 players (tiers 3 and 4) from three Norwegian football teams were analyzed as a single cohort but also stratified based on player position and menstrual status. The proportion of players at risk for REDs was 22%, that is, 17% with mild, 3% with moderate to high, and 2% with very high/extreme risk, respectively. The majority of the cohort (71%) presented with no primary indicators, while 20%, 7%, and 2% presented with one, two, and three primary indicators, respectively. Regarding secondary indicators, 57% had none, 33% had one, and 10% had two indicators. For associated indicators, 30% had none, 42% had one, 18% had two, 8% had three, and 2% had four indicators. Player position did not affect the prevalence of REDs indicators. Among noncontraceptive users (<i>n</i> = 27), secondary amenorrhea (AME) was reported by 30%. These findings indicate that health and performance teams should prioritize universal health promoting strategies rather than selective or indicative strategies. Particularly, focus on nutritional periodization to secure sufficient energy availability, mitigating the risk of problematic LEA and REDs should be addressed.</p>","PeriodicalId":93999,"journal":{"name":"European journal of sport science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/ejsc.12129","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European journal of sport science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ejsc.12129","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

A high prevalence of low energy availability (LEA) has been reported in female football players. This is of concern as problematic LEA may evolve into a syndromic pattern known as relative energy deficiency in sport (REDs). Given the difficulties in accurately assessing LEA, our study shifts emphasis to measurable indicators of REDs, serving as proxies for health detriments caused by LEA. The present cross-sectional study aimed to quantify the risk of REDs and to assess the prevalence of indicators indicative of the syndrome. 60 players (tiers 3 and 4) from three Norwegian football teams were analyzed as a single cohort but also stratified based on player position and menstrual status. The proportion of players at risk for REDs was 22%, that is, 17% with mild, 3% with moderate to high, and 2% with very high/extreme risk, respectively. The majority of the cohort (71%) presented with no primary indicators, while 20%, 7%, and 2% presented with one, two, and three primary indicators, respectively. Regarding secondary indicators, 57% had none, 33% had one, and 10% had two indicators. For associated indicators, 30% had none, 42% had one, 18% had two, 8% had three, and 2% had four indicators. Player position did not affect the prevalence of REDs indicators. Among noncontraceptive users (n = 27), secondary amenorrhea (AME) was reported by 30%. These findings indicate that health and performance teams should prioritize universal health promoting strategies rather than selective or indicative strategies. Particularly, focus on nutritional periodization to secure sufficient energy availability, mitigating the risk of problematic LEA and REDs should be addressed.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
职业女足运动员运动能量相对不足(REDs)的风险和发生率。
据报道,在女足球运动员中,低能量可用性(LEA)的发生率很高。这一点令人担忧,因为有问题的 LEA 可能会演变成一种综合征模式,即运动中的相对能量缺乏症(REDs)。鉴于难以准确评估 LEA,我们的研究将重点转移到 REDs 的可测量指标上,作为 LEA 对健康造成损害的替代指标。本横断面研究旨在量化 REDs 的风险,并评估表明该综合征的指标的流行程度。来自挪威三支足球队的60名球员(3级和4级)作为一个单一队列进行了分析,同时还根据球员的位置和月经状况进行了分层。面临 REDs 风险的球员比例为 22%,即轻度风险占 17%,中度至高度风险占 3%,极高/极端风险占 2%。大多数球员(71%)没有一级指标,分别有 20%、7% 和 2% 的球员有一个、两个和三个一级指标。在二级指标方面,57%的人没有任何指标,33%的人有一个指标,10%的人有两个指标。在相关指标方面,30%的人没有指标,42%的人有一个指标,18%的人有两个指标,8%的人有三个指标,2%的人有四个指标。玩家位置并不影响 REDs 指标的流行率。在非避孕药具使用者(n = 27)中,有 30% 的人报告了继发性闭经(AME)。这些研究结果表明,卫生和绩效团队应优先考虑促进健康的普遍战略,而不是选择性或指示性战略。特别是,应注重营养时间安排,以确保充足的能量供应,降低问题 LEA 和 REDs 的风险。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Women's rugby as a catalyst for advancing female-specific science and safety in sport. Case study of a world hour record simulation in an elite cyclist: Insight into task failure. Psychological and social factors associated with mental health of European dual career athletes: A systematic review. The effectiveness of cryostimulation exposure on sleep and recovery in male athletes: Timing considerations. The effects of plyometric versus resistance training on running economy and 5-km running time in middle-aged recreational runners.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1