Effect of Cold Water Immersion Performed on Successive Days on Physical Performance, Muscle Damage, and Inflammatory, Hormonal, and Oxidative Stress Markers in Volleyball Players

Abstract

The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of daily cold water immersion (CWI) on physical performance, muscle damage, and inflammatory, hormonal, and oxidative stress markers in volleyball. Six players were submitted to CWI and six players to a placebo, during 5 training days. Thigh circumference, squat jump, and agility were measured on the 1, 3 and 6 days. On the 1 and 6 days, blood and saliva were collected for analysis of oxidative stress, muscle damage, and inflammatory and hormonal levels. Muscle soreness and countermovement jump were quantified daily. The physical performance comparisons did not present differences and the only between group comparison with a large effect size (ES = -1.39) was in Δ% between day 1 and day 2 for CMJ. DOMS and creatine kinase increased in both groups and the ES of between group comparisons of Δ% between moments were not more than moderate. Thigh circumference increased only in the placebo group (P = 0.04) and the ES of the between group comparisons of Δ% between moments was large (1.53). No differences were found in oxidative stress, or inflammatory markers. Cortisol decreased only in the CWI-group (P < 0.05) and the ES of the between group comparisons of Δ% between moments of the testosterone/cortisol ratio (- 1.94) and IGF-1 (- 1.34) were large. Despite the positive effects of daily CWI on muscle edema and hormonal status, the limited effects of CWI on performance, muscle damage, inflammation markers, and ROS mediators signal the unimportance of the daily practice of this recovery method in volleyball players.

Cold Water Immersion Enhanced Athletes’ Wellness and 10-m Short Sprint Performance 24-h After a Simulated Mixed Martial Arts Combat

“…SJ and CMJ performances were undertaken to determine athletes’ explosive power ( de Freitas et al, 2017 ). Jumps were assessed using an infrared jump system (Optojump, Microgate ® , Bolzano, Italy) interfaced with a microcomputer.…”

Beach and indoor volleyball athletes present similar lower limb muscle activation during a countermovement jump

“…It is possible that the self-selected arm swings employed by the good and poor CFDR values were characterized by different ranges of motion and/or angular velocities, thereby influencing the comparison of relative muscle responses. In addition, despite similar height and mass characteristics in SCBV and HCIV athletes, it is possible that different body compositions further challenged the present assessment of relative muscle responses, as differences in fatigue, blood flow, and hydration status could dramatically influence EMG signals [18,19]. Even though these considerations should be addressed in subsequent evaluations, the current study indicates that relative muscle responses might not be a distinguishing feature of good in comparison with poor CMJ performance [7,8].…”

“…Other studies with healthy subjects to evaluate the force, muscle work, and exit power during the vertical jump demonstrated that the vastus medialis muscle exerted major force and work during the jump accompanied by the gluteus maximus, rectus femoris, and medial gastrocnemius muscles [19,31]. The analysis also revealed that the single-joint muscle groups contributed considerably more during the jump when compared with bi-articulated muscles, and that the adductors, abductors, and external rotators were always activated, although their mechanical response during the jump work was minor [9,31].…”

“…1 min [3,4]. CMJ height (cm) and power (W) were evaluated by using an infrared jump system (Optojump, Microgate ® , Bolzano, Italy) interfaced with a microcomputer in order to assess the muscle power of the lower limbs [19] to obtain ground reaction force (N) data by second (s).…”

“…We subsequently compared the EMG data from CMJ tests of high-level beach and indoor volleyball players. CMJ height (cm), power (W), and ground reaction force (N) were evaluated by using an infrared jump system (Optojump, Microgate ® , Bolzano, Italy) interfaced with a microcomputer in order to assess the muscle power of the lower limbs [18,19] to obtain ground reaction force data. The gathered information included: jump height (cm), eccentric force development rate (EFDR; N/s), concentric force development rate (CFDR; N/s) ( Figure 1), power (W), and muscle activation evaluated by wireless EMG of the gluteus maximus, rectus femoris, vastus medialis, and medial gastrocnemius muscles.…”