Recovery following a marathon: a comparison of cold water immersion, whole body cryotherapy and a placebo control
Abstract
Purpose
Cryotherapy is an increasingly popular recovery strategy used in an attempt to attenuate the negative impact of strenuous physical activity on subsequent exercise. Therefore, this study aimed to assess the effects of whole body cryotherapy (WBC) and cold water immersion (CWI) on markers of recovery following a marathon.
Methods
Thirty-one endurance trained males completed a marathon. Participants were randomly assigned to a CWI, WBC or placebo group. Perceptions of muscle soreness, training stress and markers of muscle function were recorded before the marathon and at 24 and 48 h post exercise. Blood samples were taken at baseline, post intervention and 24 and 48 h post intervention to assess inflammation and muscle damage.
Results
WBC had a harmful effect on muscle function compared to CWI post marathon. WBC positively influenced perceptions of training stress compared to CWI. With the exception of C-reactive protein (CRP) at 24 and 48 h, neither cryotherapy intervention positively influenced blood borne markers of inflammation or structural damage compared to placebo.
Conclusion
The findings show WBC has a negative impact on muscle function, perceptions of soreness and a number of blood parameters compared to CWI, contradicting the suggestion that WBC may be a superior recovery strategy. Further, cryotherapy is no more effective than a placebo intervention at improving functional recovery or perceptions of training stress following a marathon. These findings lend further evidence to suggest that treatment belief and the placebo effect may be largely responsible for the beneficial effects of cryotherapy on recovery following a marathon.
Publisher URL: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00421-017-3757-z
DOI: 10.1007/s00421-017-3757-z
Keeping up-to-date with research can feel impossible, with papers being published faster than you'll ever be able to read them. That's where Researcher comes in: we're simplifying discovery and making important discussions happen. With over 19,000 sources, including peer-reviewed journals, preprints, blogs, universities, podcasts and Live events across 10 research areas, you'll never miss what's important to you. It's like social media, but better. Oh, and we should mention - it's free.
Researcher displays publicly available abstracts and doesn’t host any full article content. If the content is open access, we will direct clicks from the abstracts to the publisher website and display the PDF copy on our platform. Clicks to view the full text will be directed to the publisher website, where only users with subscriptions or access through their institution are able to view the full article.