Weight management practices of Olympic weightlifting athletes

Amie Cox

doi:10.25907/00890

Weight category sports were initially created to ensure fairness and a safer competition by matching competitors with similar physical characteristics. Despite this, most athletes compete in a body weight category lower than their day-to-day training weight. The necessary body mass (BM) loss has typically been achieved via a combination of both chronic (weeks to months prior to competition) and acute (final hours to days prior to weigh in) BM management strategies. Chronic weight loss (CWL) strategies, which involve gradual dieting and/or increased physical activity, aiming to reduce fat mass while preserving lean mass. In contrast, acute weight loss (AWL) strategies focus on rapid BM reduction through methods such as fluid restriction and gastrointestinal content manipulation. The literature predominantly focuses on the BM management practices of athletes competing in combat sports. Combat sports have conflicting physiological demands, with differing weigh-in requirements, including singular versus repeat weigh ins and can have weight regain limits. Olympic weightlifting (OWL) is unique amongst weight category sports due to its distinct focus on explosive power, requiring athletes to perform high-intensity, technical lifts (snatch and clean and jerk) that achieve some of the highest power outputs among strength sports. Thus, it is difficult to make inferences from one weight category sport and apply it to another. The primary purpose of this thesis was to explore the BM management practices of OWL athletes. The review of literature confirms little is known about the BM management practices of OWL athletes, despite its inclusion in the Olympic games for over 100 years. A range of methods are available to assess the BM management practices of athletes. Most research into the BM management practices of athletes competing in weight category sport have used an anonymous questionnaire, which was originally validated in judo athletes. However, few have validated their modified questionnaires prior to administration. Failing to validate a questionnaire for the population under investigation, prior to administration, draws into question the sensitivity and reliability of the data captured. It was deemed critical that validation of the tool be used in this population of OWL athletes, in line with best practice guidance. As a result, a structured three-phase validity process was utilised, focusing on content, face validity, and internal reliability. The Delphi technique was employed, involving seven experts who participated in three anonymous rounds to achieve consensus on the questionnaire items. Online interviews with a pilot group of six OWL athletes assessed readability and item difficulty, followed by a test-retest process with a second pilot group of nine athletes to verify reliability using Pearson’s correlation. All items in the first round achieved consensus with an item-content validity index (CVI) of 0.93, scale-CVI average of 0.98, and no items were recommended for deletion. The average difficulty rating was 4.8/5 (1 = difficult to understand; 5 = easy to understand). Internal reliability was high for weight history (r = 0.93) and weight loss methods (r = 0.83), and moderate for influences (r = 0.65). This comprehensive approach confirmed the adapted questionnaire was a valid tool for assessing the BM management practices of OWL athletes. The tool was subsequently administered at an OWL competition and aimed to investigate the prevalence and magnitude of BM loss, and identify the most commonly used BM management practices by OWL athletes. Additionally, the questionnaire also sought to understand where athletes sourced BM management information from and if this differs between sex, athlete calibre, and weight category. Data was collected from competitive male (n = 55) and female (n = 94) OWL athletes using the validated survey, which comprised sections on demographics, training/competition history, weight history, sources of influence, and BM management practices. The BM management survey revealed that over three quarters of OWL athletes employed chronic and/or acute weight loss strategies to compete in lighter weight categories than their habitual training weight. The usual BM loss (2-3%) in the week before competition was within the recent recommended guidelines from the American College of Sports Medicine. Lower calibre athletes were more likely to use low fibre (P = .014; r = -.218), spitting (P = .003; r = -.290) and sauna (P = .010; r = -.245) to make weight. Gradual dieting was the most commonly used CWL strategy. Fluid restriction and low food weight high-calorie options were the most commonly used AWL strategies used in the week before competition. Female athletes were more likely to use gradual dieting (P = .043; r= -.192) and were less likely to increase their exercise (P = .063; r = -.177) and utilise fasting (P = .038; r = .201) compared to their male counterparts. Females further identified dietitians/nutritionists (P = .009; r = -.250) as a highly influential source of information. This research offers new insights into the practices of OWL athletes. This is the first study to have a predominantly female participation rate, providing awareness into the BM management practices of female athletes. This study not only validates a crucial tool for assessing BM management practices in OWL athletes but also lays a foundation for future research aimed at enhancing health and performance strategies tailored to the specific needs of OWL competitions.

Weight management practices of Olympic weightlifting athletes

Files and links (1)

Abstract

Details

Metrics