Why the study?
Post-exercise hypotension is of clinical and sports relevance, but the influence of different recovery methods on post-exercise hemodynamic response required comparison.
Do cold-water immersion or dry needling improve post-exercise hemodynamic recovery compared to passive recovery in paraplegic sportsmen?
Do cold-water immersion or dry needling improve post-exercise hemodynamic recovery compared to passive recovery in paraplegic sportsmen?
Dry needling and cold-water immersion provide better heart rate recovery than passive recovery after strength training in paraplegic sportsmen, with varying temporal effects on systolic blood pressure.
May hasten HR recovery post-ST in paraplegics; hypothesis-generating, needs larger trials before any clinical consideration.
Post-exercise hypotension is of great clinical relevance and also in sports training settings, as recovery speed is important. The aim of this study was to compare the influence of different recovery methods on post-exercise hemodynamic response. Twelve male paraplegic sportsmen (25.40 ± 3.30 years) performed a strength training (ST) session using the bench press exercise. After the ST, three recovery methods were randomly performed over a 15-min period: passive recovery (PR), cold-water (CW) and dry needle (DN). Blood pressure (BP), heart rate (HR) and myocardial oxygen were measured before and post ST, as well as post the recovery method. Results: Dry needling induced lower systolic blood pressure (SBP) immediately after the treatment when compared with the other recovery methods, but the contrary was observed at 50 and 60-min post recovery, where records with DN exhibit higher mean values (η2p = 0.330). There were no differences in post-exercise diastolic BP and mean BP between recovery methods. There was a significantly higher HR after the PR method, when compared with CW and with DN (η2p = 0.426). The same was observed for double product and for myocardial oxygen, though with a larger effect size (η2p = 0.446). We conclude that dry needling seems to induce a faster SBP lowering immediately after the procedure but at 50-min post procedure the cold-water method showed better result. As for HR, both procedures (DN and CW) showed a better recovery when compared with passive recovery, along the several moments of measurement.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Aidar et al. (2022) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: