Physiological and Biochemical Evaluation of Different Types of Recovery in National Level Paralympic Powerlifting.
Paralympic powerlifting
cold water immersion
dry needling
plasma cytokines
recovery
Journal
International journal of environmental research and public health
ISSN: 1660-4601
Titre abrégé: Int J Environ Res Public Health
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101238455
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
13 05 2021
13 05 2021
Historique:
received:
21
04
2021
revised:
11
05
2021
accepted:
11
05
2021
entrez:
2
6
2021
pubmed:
3
6
2021
medline:
25
6
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Recovery from training is vital as it ensures training and performance to continue at high intensities and longer durations to stimulate the body and cause further adaptations. To evaluate different methods of post-workout recovery in Paralympic powerlifting athletes. Twelve male athletes participated (25.4 ± 3.3 years; 70.3 ± 12.1 kg). The presence of muscle edema, pain threshold, plasma cytokines, and performance measurement were evaluated five times. The recovery methods used in this study were passive recovery (PR), dry needling (DN), and cold-water immersion (CWI). The data analysis showed that the maximal force decreased compared to the pretest value at 15 min and 2 h. The results also revealed that CWI and DN increased Interleukin 2 (IL-2) levels from 24 to 48 h more than that from 2 h to 24 h. After DN, muscle thickness did not increase significantly in any of the muscles, and after 2 h, muscle thickness decreased significantly again in the major pectoralis muscle. After CWI, pain pressure stabilized after 15 min and increased significantly again after 2 h for acromial pectoralis. The strength training sessions generate several changes in metabolism and different recovery methods contribute differently to maintain homeostasis in Paralympic powerlifting athletes.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Recovery from training is vital as it ensures training and performance to continue at high intensities and longer durations to stimulate the body and cause further adaptations.
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate different methods of post-workout recovery in Paralympic powerlifting athletes.
METHODS
Twelve male athletes participated (25.4 ± 3.3 years; 70.3 ± 12.1 kg). The presence of muscle edema, pain threshold, plasma cytokines, and performance measurement were evaluated five times. The recovery methods used in this study were passive recovery (PR), dry needling (DN), and cold-water immersion (CWI).
RESULTS
The data analysis showed that the maximal force decreased compared to the pretest value at 15 min and 2 h. The results also revealed that CWI and DN increased Interleukin 2 (IL-2) levels from 24 to 48 h more than that from 2 h to 24 h. After DN, muscle thickness did not increase significantly in any of the muscles, and after 2 h, muscle thickness decreased significantly again in the major pectoralis muscle. After CWI, pain pressure stabilized after 15 min and increased significantly again after 2 h for acromial pectoralis.
CONCLUSION
The strength training sessions generate several changes in metabolism and different recovery methods contribute differently to maintain homeostasis in Paralympic powerlifting athletes.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34067984
pii: ijerph18105155
doi: 10.3390/ijerph18105155
pmc: PMC8152222
pii:
doi:
Substances chimiques
Water
059QF0KO0R
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Références
Sports Med. 2010 Jun 1;40(6):509-17
pubmed: 20524715
Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2008 Sep;3(3):331-46
pubmed: 19211945
Medicina (Kaunas). 2020 Apr 01;56(4):
pubmed: 32244628
J Immunol Res. 2018 Jun 26;2018:9675216
pubmed: 30046617
Phys Ther Sport. 2012 May;13(2):101-14
pubmed: 22498151
Int J Sports Med. 2016 Nov;37(12):937-943
pubmed: 27557407
J Appl Physiol (1985). 2000 Oct;89(4):1499-504
pubmed: 11007588
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019 Apr 10;16(7):
pubmed: 30974799
J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2017 Mar;47(3):133-149
pubmed: 28158962
Nutrients. 2020 Aug 19;12(9):
pubmed: 32824920
Sports Med. 2006;36(9):747-65
pubmed: 16937951
Sports Med. 2016 Apr;46(4):503-14
pubmed: 26581833
Psychol Bull. 1992 Jul;112(1):155-9
pubmed: 19565683
Front Physiol. 2016 Jan 12;6:424
pubmed: 26793125
J Int Soc Sports Nutr. 2020 Aug 20;17(1):44
pubmed: 32819393
Br J Sports Med. 2010 Mar;44(4):280-3
pubmed: 18487257
J Appl Physiol (1985). 2020 Aug 1;129(2):353-365
pubmed: 32644914
Clin Physiol Funct Imaging. 2010 Sep;30(5):338-343
pubmed: 20618358
Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol. 2017 May;27(4):441-448
pubmed: 28424882
Eur J Appl Physiol. 2016 Jan;116(1):77-84
pubmed: 26293124
Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2007 May;86(5):397-403
pubmed: 17449984
Sports Med. 2006;36(9):781-96
pubmed: 16937953
J Strength Cond Res. 2014 Nov;28(11):3293-7
pubmed: 24845210
J Appl Physiol (1985). 2013 Jan 1;114(1):66-72
pubmed: 23104690
Sports Med. 2013 Nov;43(11):1101-30
pubmed: 23743793
Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2010 Feb;89(2):133-40
pubmed: 19404189
Scand J Rehabil Med. 1999 Jun;31(2):89-93
pubmed: 10380724
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Jul 17;17(14):
pubmed: 32708894
Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2008 Jul 18;372(1):152-6
pubmed: 18474227
Clin J Sport Med. 2020 Nov;30(6):533-538
pubmed: 30365470
J Appl Physiol (1985). 2017 Mar 1;122(3):559-570
pubmed: 28035017
Front Physiol. 2018 Apr 26;9:403
pubmed: 29755363