ArticleJournal of exercise rehabilitation2016
The effects of compression garments and electrostimulation on athletes' muscle soreness and recovery.
Article in Journal of exercise rehabilitation, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Oleuropein-based olive leaf extract enhances muscle mitochondrial bioenergetics response to moderate - but not maximal - intensity exercise in humans.The Journal of physiology · 2026Article
- Putting the Squeeze on Compression Garments: Current Evidence and Recommendations for Future Research: A Systematic Scoping Review.Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2022Article
- Impact of Active Recovery and Whole-Body Electromyostimulation on Blood-Flow and Blood Lactate Removal in Healthy People.Frontiers in physiology · 2020Article
- Management of an iatrogenic injury to the tibial nerve in a 24-year-old hurdle runner.The Journal of international medical research · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this study, we explained the effects of compression garment and electrostimulation on athletes' recovery period by evaluating blood lactate and isokinetic peak torque parameters. Twenty volunteers (15.55± 0.51 yr) were included to study. At recovery period, blood samples was taken for lactate values at 0th, 3rd, 5th, 15th, 30th min. The isokinetic strength test was performed on right ankle at 15th min and on the left ankle at 30th min. The same protocol was performed for compression garment on 2 weeks and for electrostimulation on third weeks and results were compared. There wasn't any significant difference on blood lactate levels within groups. At women; there was not any significant difference on isokinetic peak torques within two groups. but at electro-stimulation usage we found significant increases on right plantar flexion (P<0.1), right dorsal flexion (RDF) (P<0.1) and left plantar flexion (LPF) (P<0.1) values compared to control measurements. At men; with compression garment usage, there was significant increase on LPF values compared to control measurements. At electrostimulation usage, we found significant increases on RDF (P<0.1) and left dorsal flexion (P<0.1) values compared to control measurements. During recovery, there is not any beneficial effect seen on blood lactate level within two groups. When compared to passive rest, compression garments and electrostimulation interventions effects on force generation capacity at recovery are statically significant. Also in terms of force generation capacity; usage of electrostimulation during 15 min and compression garments during 30 min were statically more significant.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.