Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27706260›Full record

ArticlePloS one2016

Comparison of Two Different Modes of Active Recovery on Muscles Performance after Fatiguing Exercise in Mountain Canoeist and Football Players.

Anna Mika, Łukasz Oleksy, Renata Kielnar, Ewa Wodka-Natkaniec, Magdalena Twardowska, Kamil Kamiński, Zbigniew Małek

Registry-linked trialAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04201977 (Comparison of Different Forms of Recovery on the Functionality After Physical Exercise), which is not on this map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT04201977 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2019, after this paper: background citation

Comparison of Different Forms of Recovery on the Functionality After Physical Exercise: Randomized Clinical Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversidade Federal de Santa MariaRan2019 to 2021Enrolled50ConditionsMassage, Inflammatory Response, Muscle, Skeletal, Cryotherapy EffectArmsFoam Roller Recovery, Active recovery, Immersion in cold water, Passive recovery
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Optimizing active recovery strategies for finger flexor fatigue.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Anna MikaDepartment of Clinical Rehabilitation, University of Physical Education in Krakow, Poland.
Łukasz OleksyDepartment of Clinical Rehabilitation, University of Physical Education in Krakow, Poland.
Renata KielnarInstitute of Physiotherapy, Faculty of Medicine, University of Rzeszow, Rzeszow, Poland.
Ewa Wodka-NatkaniecDepartment of Orthopaedics, Jagiellonian University, Collegium Medicum, Krakow, Poland.
Magdalena TwardowskaInstitute of Physical Education, State Higher Vocational School in Nowy Sącz, Nowy Sącz, Poland.
Kamil KamińskiPhysiotherapy Clinic "Effective Rehabilitation", Warsaw, Poland.
Zbigniew MałekInstitute of Physical Education, State Higher Vocational School in Nowy Sącz, Nowy Sącz, Poland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe aim of this study is to assess if the application of different methods of active recovery (working the same or different muscle groups from those which were active during fatiguing exercise) results in significant differences in muscle performance and if the efficiency of the active recovery method is dependent upon the specific sport activity (training loads).

designA parallel group non-blinded trial with repeated measurements.

methodsThirteen mountain canoeists and twelve football players participated in this study. Measurements of the bioelectrical activity, torque, work and power of the vastus lateralis oblique, vastus medialis oblique, and rectus femoris muscles were performed during isokinetic tests at a velocity of 90°/s.

resultsActive legs recovery in both groups was effective in reducing fatigue from evaluated muscles, where a significant decrease in fatigue index was observed. The muscles peak torque, work and power parameters did not change significantly after both modes of active recovery, but in both groups significant decrease was seen after passive recovery.

conclusionsWe suggest that 20 minutes of post-exercise active recovery involving the same muscles that were active during the fatiguing exercise is more effective in fatigue recovery than active exercise using the muscles that were not involved in the exercise. Active arm exercises were less effective in both groups which indicates a lack of a relationship between the different training regimens and the part of the body which is principally used during training.

Indexed as

AdultExerciseFootballHumansMaleMuscle FatigueQuadriceps MuscleRecovery of FunctionSportsTorque

Identifiers

PMID27706260
PMCPMC5051742

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.