Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34870801›Full record

ArticleSports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.)2022

Putting the Squeeze on Compression Garments: Current Evidence and Recommendations for Future Research: A Systematic Scoping Review.

Jonathon Weakley, James Broatch, Shane O'Riordan, Matthew Morrison, Nirav Maniar, Shona L Halson

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
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

6 authors.

Jonathon WeakleySchool of Behavioural and Health Sciences, Australian Catholic University, 1100 Nudgee Rd, Banyo, Brisbane, QLD, Australia. Jonathon.weakley@acu.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0001-7892-4885
James BroatchInstitute for Health and Sport (iHeS), Victoria University, Footscray, VIC, Australia.
Shane O'RiordanInstitute for Health and Sport (iHeS), Victoria University, Footscray, VIC, Australia.
Matthew MorrisonSchool of Behavioural and Health Sciences, Australian Catholic University, 1100 Nudgee Rd, Banyo, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
Nirav ManiarSports Performance, Recovery, Injury and New Technologies (SPRINT) Research Centre, Australian Catholic University, Fitzroy, VIC, Australia.
Shona L HalsonSchool of Behavioural and Health Sciences, Australian Catholic University, 1100 Nudgee Rd, Banyo, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCompression garments are regularly worn during exercise to improve physical performance, mitigate fatigue responses, and enhance recovery. However, evidence for their efficacy is varied and the methodological approaches and outcome measures used within the scientific literature are diverse.

objectivesThe aim of this scoping review is to provide a comprehensive overview of the effects of compression garments on commonly assessed outcome measures in response to exercise, including: performance, biomechanical, neuromuscular, cardiovascular, cardiorespiratory, muscle damage, thermoregulatory, and perceptual responses.

methodsA systematic search of electronic databases (PubMed, SPORTDiscus, Web of Science and CINAHL Complete) was performed from the earliest record to 27 December, 2020.

resultsIn total, 183 studies were identified for qualitative analysis with the following breakdown: performance and muscle function outcomes: 115 studies (63%), biomechanical and neuromuscular: 59 (32%), blood and saliva markers: 85 (46%), cardiovascular: 76 (42%), cardiorespiratory: 39 (21%), thermoregulatory: 19 (10%) and perceptual: 98 (54%). Approximately 85% (n = 156) of studies were published between 2010 and 2020.

conclusionsEvidence is equivocal as to whether garments improve physical performance, with little evidence supporting improvements in kinetic or kinematic outcomes. Compression likely reduces muscle oscillatory properties and has a positive effect on sensorimotor systems. Findings suggest potential increases in arterial blood flow; however, it is unlikely that compression garments meaningfully change metabolic responses, blood pressure, heart rate, and cardiorespiratory measures. Compression garments increase localised skin temperature and may reduce perceptions of muscle soreness and pain following exercise; however, rating of perceived exertion during exercise is likely unchanged. It is unlikely that compression garments negatively influence exercise-related outcomes. Future research should assess wearer belief in compression garments, report pressure ranges at multiple sites as well as garment material, and finally examine individual responses and varying compression coverage areas.

Indexed as

ClothingMuscle FatigueExerciseHeart RateHumansMyalgia

Identifiers

PMID34870801
PMCPMC9023423

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.