Abstract：
BACKGROUND: Mental fatigue and mental recovery have gained scientific attention in relation to sporting performance, yet best practice assessment and management methods are lacking. A greater understanding of current knowledge and practices in high-performance sport are necessary.
OBJECTIVE: To understand the contemporary knowledge, beliefs, monitoring processes, management strategies, perceived responsibility, sources of evidence, and challenges, when assessing the mental fatigue and mental recovery of athletes in high-performance sport.
METHODS: A mixed-methods survey approach obtained information from 156 multi-disciplinary high-performance sport practitioners. Descriptive outputs were reported and potential differences between key concepts were detected using Wilcoxon-signed rank analysis. Thematic analysis interpreted open-text responses.
RESULTS: Only 11.5% and 5.1% of respondents indicated they were \"very\" knowledgeable about mental fatigue and mental recovery, respectively. Knowledge (p < 0.001) and confidence in application (p = 0.001) were significantly greater for mental fatigue than mental recovery. Nearly all respondents perceived mental fatigue and mental recovery impacted training and competition performance, with a greater negative impact during competition (p < 0.001). A limited number of respondents reported deliberate assessment (31.1%) or management (51.2%) of mental fatigue and mental recovery. A combination of sources of evidence were used to inform practice, with common challenges to implementation including staff knowledge, athlete-buy in, time-availability, and a lack of evidence. Practitioners reported that assessing and managing mental fatigue and mental recovery was multi-disciplinary in nature.
CONCLUSIONS: Practitioners reported that mental fatigue and mental recovery did impact performance, yet this was not reflected in the implementation of evidence-based assessment and management practices in high-performance sport.
OBJECTIVE: To understand the contemporary knowledge, beliefs, monitoring processes, management strategies, perceived responsibility, sources of evidence, and challenges, when assessing the mental fatigue and mental recovery of athletes in high-performance sport.
METHODS: A mixed-methods survey approach obtained information from 156 multi-disciplinary high-performance sport practitioners. Descriptive outputs were reported and potential differences between key concepts were detected using Wilcoxon-signed rank analysis. Thematic analysis interpreted open-text responses.
RESULTS: Only 11.5% and 5.1% of respondents indicated they were \"very\" knowledgeable about mental fatigue and mental recovery, respectively. Knowledge (p < 0.001) and confidence in application (p = 0.001) were significantly greater for mental fatigue than mental recovery. Nearly all respondents perceived mental fatigue and mental recovery impacted training and competition performance, with a greater negative impact during competition (p < 0.001). A limited number of respondents reported deliberate assessment (31.1%) or management (51.2%) of mental fatigue and mental recovery. A combination of sources of evidence were used to inform practice, with common challenges to implementation including staff knowledge, athlete-buy in, time-availability, and a lack of evidence. Practitioners reported that assessing and managing mental fatigue and mental recovery was multi-disciplinary in nature.
CONCLUSIONS: Practitioners reported that mental fatigue and mental recovery did impact performance, yet this was not reflected in the implementation of evidence-based assessment and management practices in high-performance sport.
摘要：
背景：精神疲劳和精神恢复已经获得了与运动表现有关的科学关注，然而，缺乏最佳实践评估和管理方法。有必要更好地了解高性能运动的当前知识和实践。
目的：为了了解当代知识，信仰,监测过程，管理策略，感知责任，证据来源,和挑战，在评估高性能运动中运动员的精神疲劳和心理恢复时。
方法：混合方法调查方法从156名多学科高绩效运动从业者那里获得了信息。报告描述性输出，并使用Wilcoxon符号秩分析检测关键概念之间的潜在差异。主题分析解释了开放文本回答。
结果：只有11.5％和5.1％的受访者表示他们“非常”了解精神疲劳和精神康复，分别。心理疲劳的知识（p<0.001）和应用信心（p=0.001）明显高于心理恢复。几乎所有受访者都认为精神疲劳和心理恢复会影响训练和比赛表现，在比赛中产生更大的负面影响(p<0.001)。有限数量的受访者报告了对精神疲劳和精神恢复的刻意评估（31.1％）或管理（51.2％）。证据来源的组合被用来为实践提供信息，实施面临共同的挑战，包括员工知识，运动员购买，时间可用性，缺乏证据.从业人员报告说，评估和管理精神疲劳和精神恢复本质上是多学科的。
结论：从业者报告说，精神疲劳和精神恢复确实会影响表现，然而，在高性能运动中实施循证评估和管理实践并没有反映这一点。
目的：为了了解当代知识，信仰,监测过程，管理策略，感知责任，证据来源,和挑战，在评估高性能运动中运动员的精神疲劳和心理恢复时。
方法：混合方法调查方法从156名多学科高绩效运动从业者那里获得了信息。报告描述性输出，并使用Wilcoxon符号秩分析检测关键概念之间的潜在差异。主题分析解释了开放文本回答。
结果：只有11.5％和5.1％的受访者表示他们“非常”了解精神疲劳和精神康复，分别。心理疲劳的知识（p<0.001）和应用信心（p=0.001）明显高于心理恢复。几乎所有受访者都认为精神疲劳和心理恢复会影响训练和比赛表现，在比赛中产生更大的负面影响(p<0.001)。有限数量的受访者报告了对精神疲劳和精神恢复的刻意评估（31.1％）或管理（51.2％）。证据来源的组合被用来为实践提供信息，实施面临共同的挑战，包括员工知识，运动员购买，时间可用性，缺乏证据.从业人员报告说，评估和管理精神疲劳和精神恢复本质上是多学科的。
结论：从业者报告说，精神疲劳和精神恢复确实会影响表现，然而，在高性能运动中实施循证评估和管理实践并没有反映这一点。
