Vascular Occlusion and Sequential Compression for Recovery After Resistance Exercise

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to evaluate vascular occlusion (OCC) and sequential intermittent pneumatic compression (SIPC) as recovery strategies after fatiguing resistance exercise. Twelve strength-trained male participants (age: 24.0 ± 6.3 years, height: 180.4 ± 9.7 cm, and weight: 84.8 ± 9.6 kg) participated in a randomized cross-over study. Participants performed a fatiguing resistance exercise bout consisting of 10 sets with 10 repetitions of back squats at 70% 1 repetition maximum with 3-minute rest between sets. Outcome measures of perceived recovery status, muscle soreness, concentric peak isokinetic torque of the quadriceps, squat jump (SJ) height, and countermovement jump (CMJ) height were taken before the fatiguing resistance exercise bout and repeated immediately post, 1 hour, and 24 hours later. Immediately after the postexercise measures, participants undertook 1 of the 3 recovery strategies: OCC, SIPC, and a passive control (CON). Concentric peak isokinetic torque of the quadriceps was decreased significantly immediately post and 1 hour after the fatiguing resistance exercise bout compared with baseline values (p ≤ 0.05). Mean SJ and CMJ jump height decreased significantly immediately post and 1 hour compared with baseline measures, but only the SJ was significantly decreased at 24 hours. There were no significant differences between conditions for any of the postexercise measures (p > 0.05). In conclusion, this study indicates that OCC and SIPC are not effective for attenuating muscle performance loss after a fatiguing resistance exercise bout relative to passive recovery.

Effects of intermittent pneumatic compression vs. neuromuscular electrical stimulation on recovery following anaerobic exercise in male basketball players

“…The NMES groups in the present study was administered a low frequency electrical stimulation during the recovery period showed a significant recovery of blood lactate and anaerobic performance as compared to control group, which is similar to the results found in previous studies [21,24,26,27,30,[38][39][40][41], although some studies have also reported contrasting findings [21,[42][43][44]. IFT used produces biphasic pulses within the tissues & has an advantage in that it does not cause skin irritation unlike some other electrical techniques [45].…”

The effect of lower limb occlusion on recovery following sprint exercise in academy rugby players

“…Research completed by Beaven et al 9 investigated healthy, active nonsport participating males and found vascular occlusion improved recovery. However, Northey et al 14 and the current study investigated the use of vascular occlusion in welltrained individuals, identifying no effect on recovery. This potentially suggests that training status may mediate the efficacy of vascular occlusion as a recovery strategy.…”

“…Unfortunately, the evidence for vascular occlusion as an effective post-exercise recovery modality is currently inconsistent. Two investigations identified improved recovery 10,11 whereas others 13,14,15 disagree. Methodological differences exist when implementing vascular occlusion, for example standardised cuff pressures have been implemented despite recommendations regarding individualised application relative to thigh girth and resting blood measurements 16 .…”

Pre-competition and recovery strategies in elite sport: the use of vascular occlusion and ischemic preconditioning

“…However, there is disparity within the research that may be explained by methodological differences in the implementation of vascular occlusion, variance in participant activity levels and variability in the stimulus for EIMD. Neither Borne et al 2016, Northey et al (2016) or Garcia et al 2017found vascular occlusion improved rate of recovery in trained participants. Although differences in participant activity levels existed, the methodologies also varied, for instance, Borne et al (2016) applied 24 min of continual pressure using elastic wraps versus the intermittent application of pressure for 12 min in other studies (Beaven et al 2012;Northey et al 2016).…”

“…To date, five studies have investigated the use of vascular occlusion as a potential recovery strategy (Table 2.4) with two studies reporting a beneficial effect (Beaven et al 2012;Page et al 2017), and three studies reporting no effect (Northey et al 2016;Borne et al 2016;Garcia et al 2017).…”