The Use of Recovery Strategies in Professional Soccer: A Worldwide Survey

Abstract

Purpose: To survey soccer practitioners’ recovery strategy: (1) use, (2) perceived effectiveness, and (3) factors influencing their implementation in professional soccer. Methods: A cross-sectional convenience sample of professional soccer club/confederation practitioners completed a web-based survey (April to July 2020). Pearson chi-square and Fisher exact tests with Cramer V (φ − c) assessed relationships and their strength, respectively, between the perceived effectiveness and frequency of strategy use. Results: A total of 80 soccer practitioners (13 countries) completed the survey. The 3 most important recovery objectives were “alleviating muscle damage/fatigue,” “minimizing injury risk,” and “performance optimization.” The most frequently used strategies were active recovery, structured recovery day, extra rest day, massage, cold-water therapy, and carbohydrate provision (predominantly on match day and match day + 1). Relationships were identified between perceived effectiveness and frequency of strategy use for sleep medication (P < .001, φ − c = 0.48), carbohydrate provision (P = .007, φ − c = 0.60), protein provision (P = .007, φ − c = 0.63), an extra rest day (P < .001, φ − c = 0.56), and a structured recovery day (P = .049, φ − c = 0.50). Conclusions: The study demonstrates that professional soccer practitioners have a range of objectives geared toward enhancing player recovery. A disconnect is apparent between the perceived effectiveness of many recovery strategies and their frequency of use in an applied setting. Novel data indicate that strategies are most frequently employed around match day. Challenges to strategy adoption are mainly competing disciplinary interests and resource limitations. Researchers and practitioners should liaise to ensure that the complexities involved with operating in an applied environment are elucidated and apposite study designs are adopted, in turn, facilitating the use of practically effective and compatible recovery modalities.

The Application of Recovery Strategies in Basketball: A Worldwide Survey

“…Accordingly, participants reported that the excessive cost and lack of devices/facilities were the main barriers to the use of recovery strategies. These findings are in agreement with previous research ( Simjanovic et al, 2009 ; Rey et al, 2018 ; Field et al, 2021 ), as accessibility has been frequently reported as a barrier to the implementation of recovery strategies. Therefore, it was expected that recovery strategies which are expensive and/or require specific facilities (e.g., cryotherapy, pool recovery, contrast water therapy and recovery/sleep devices) would be used relatively rarely, despite being often perceived as useful.…”

“…Somewhat surprisingly, only a minority (27%) of the participants indicated lack of time as a barrier, while previous studies in other sports identified it as a major obstacle ( Simjanovic et al, 2009 ; Rey et al, 2018 ; Fullagar et al, 2019 ). Players’ negative perception of recovery strategies was mentioned as a possible barrier by a similar proportion of the participants (25%), supporting the notion that players preferences may not match scientific recommendations ( Crowther et al, 2017 ; Field et al, 2021 ). Efficient communication and education of players about the methods, tools and rationale supporting evidence-based interventions is crucial in order to effectively implement sound, effective practice ( Le Meur and Torres-Ronda, 2019 ; Field et al, 2021 ).…”

“…Players’ negative perception of recovery strategies was mentioned as a possible barrier by a similar proportion of the participants (25%), supporting the notion that players preferences may not match scientific recommendations ( Crowther et al, 2017 ; Field et al, 2021 ). Efficient communication and education of players about the methods, tools and rationale supporting evidence-based interventions is crucial in order to effectively implement sound, effective practice ( Le Meur and Torres-Ronda, 2019 ; Field et al, 2021 ). Moreover, practitioners should consider minimizing the stress induced by the use of recovery strategies.…”

“…As this is a pilot study, the a priori sample size calculation was not performed. We considered the amount of responders to be adequate in relation to the sample size of previous similar studies ( Van Wyk and Lambert, 2009 ; Fleming et al, 2018 ; Field et al, 2021 ) . The study was approved by the Lithuanian Sports University Ethics Committee [2020-05-19 NR.…”

The efficacy of intermittent pneumatic compression and negative pressure therapy on muscle function, soreness and serum indices of muscle damage: a randomized controlled trial

“…Mechanical compression, known as Intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC), has become increasingly popular in recent years, especially in athletes. A recent survey on professional soccer practitioners revealed that intermittent pneumatic compression was adopted by 57% of the teams surveyed [ 8 ]. The underlying assumption is that IPC increases blood circulation,, thus allowing for a faster regeneration due to improved tissue fluid exchange [ 9 ].…”