Effects of seated and standing cold water immersion on recovery from repeated sprinting.
Level 2 - randomized trial
Individual randomized controlled trial
PubMed 25573221 · doi:10.1080/02640414.2014.996914
What was done
Twenty-four well-trained male games players (mean age 23 ± 3 years, VO2max 57.5 ± 4.9 ml/kg/min) completed the Loughborough Intermittent Shuttle Test (LIST) and were randomly assigned to one of three groups: control, seated cold water immersion (CWI), or standing CWI (14 min at 14°C). Maximal isometric voluntary contraction, counter-movement jump, creatine kinase, C-reactive protein, interleukin-6, and delayed onset muscle soreness (DOMS) were measured before and up to 72 h post-exercise.
What was found
All measured variables showed significant main effects for time following exercise (P < 0.05). There were no significant group differences between the control group and either cold water immersion group for any functional or biochemical marker. Seated CWI was associated with significantly lower DOMS than standing CWI (effect size = 1.86, P = 0.001).
Why it matters
Increasing hydrostatic pressure by standing during cold water immersion does not enhance recovery compared to seated immersion, and neither immersion method improves objective markers of recovery over passive rest following intermittent sprint exercise.
Limits
Small sample size (24 participants divided among three groups, approximately 8 per arm). The study only evaluated young, well-trained males, limiting generalizability. Specific numerical values for the performance and biochemical markers were not provided in the abstract.
Cited by
- partial Controlled trials demonstrate that hydrostatic pressure from water immersion provides physiological recovery benefits independent of water temperature.