4.6 Article

Comparison of body composition and nutrients' deficiencies between Portuguese rink-hockey players

Journal

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PEDIATRICS
Volume 176, Issue 1, Pages 41-50

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00431-016-2803-x

Keywords

Body composition; Energy; Children; Adolescents; Athletes; Rink-hockey

Categories

Funding

  1. National Founds from FCT-Foundation for Science and Technology [PEst-OE/SADG/UI0283/2015]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We evaluated dietary intake and body composition of child and adolescent rink-hockey players and controls. Seventy-two male rink-hockey players (38 children and 34 adolescents) and 79 male controls (43 children and 36 adolescents) were evaluated in order to collect training data, detailed dietary intake and body composition. Rink-hockey players presented significantly lower body fat (BF) and higher fat-free mass (FFM) than controls. Mean intakes of carbohydrate and protein were considered to be adequate, but mean intakes of fat were above the recommended levels in athletes. Significant differences were found for energy intake (EI) and exercise energy expenditure (EEE) between athletes and controls (P < 0.05), resulting in some cases of low energy availability in rink-hockey players. Significant group differences (P < 0.05) were also observed for vitamins and mineral intakes in child and adolescent rink-hockey players due to higher mean intakes in control groups. Low intakes of vitamins D, E and K, calcium, iron, boron and magnesium were reported in athletes, with exception for thiamine (P = 0.449), riboflavin (P = 0.246), pantothenic acid (P = 0.065), magnesium (P = 0.061) and phosphorus (P = 0.051) in children and for niacin (P = 0.652), vitamin D (P = 0.406) and zinc (P = 0.783) in adolescents. Conclusion: Nutritional deficiencies in macronutrients and micronutrients observed in very young rink-hockey players can impair their growth and development with negative consequences upon athletic performance.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available