The use of technology compared to the traditional educational methods to improve hydration status of club-level collegiate athletes with a focus on cognitive performance

155539-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
It is widely documented and accepted that athletes have difficulty maintaining adequate hydration status and that dehydration is a key risk factor for the heat-related illnesses commonly observed among athletes. Research has also suggested that hydration status can influence

It is widely documented and accepted that athletes have difficulty maintaining adequate hydration status and that dehydration is a key risk factor for the heat-related illnesses commonly observed among athletes. Research has also suggested that hydration status can influence cognitive performance. Educational interventions focused on rehydration strategies have had minimal success reducing dehydration rates; hence, alternative interventions promoting adequate hydration status in athletes should be explored. This trial examined the efficacy of a commercial hydration mobile application (app) for reducing dehydration rates in campus athletes. Fifty-eight college students aged 18-40 y, who participated in club-level collegiate athletics were recruited from a large Southwestern university and randomized by team to one of two study arms, the Standard of Care – Education (EDU) or the hydration mobile app (APP), to determine if app technology improved hydration status as compared to traditional education messaging. Twenty-three (79%) in the EDU group and twenty (69%) in the APP group were mildly-dehydrated at baseline based on the three-day averages of hydration assessment (USG 1.010). Moreover, 31% (n=9) and 28% (n=8) of the EDU and APP groups, respectively, were dehydrated (USG 1.020). No significant differences were found between the EDU and APP groups following the intervention. Three-day average post-intervention USG testing showed 76% (n=22) and 72% (n=21) of the EDU and APP groups respectively were at best mildly-dehydrated. Additionally, 28% (n=8) and 17% (n=5) were considered dehydrated. Neither intervention improved hydration status after four weeks of treatment. Further analyses of cognitive measures were conducted by hydration assessment groups at baseline and post-intervention: hydrated (HYD) (USG < 1.020) or dehydrated (DEH) (USG 1.020). No significant differences between hydration status were found between intervention groups. Additionally, no significant improvements were seen for either group, which indicates there is still a need for a novel way to improve hydration status in this population. Multi-dimensional interventions and individualized interventions to improve hydration status in this at-risk population may be more effective. Additional research should be conducted to determine if there is any cognitive performance enhancement associated with dehydration or mild-dehydration by reassessing previous data and conducting future trials.
Date Created
2017
Agent