The impact of various post-exercise interventions on the relief of delayed-onset muscle soreness: a randomized controlled trial

不同运动后干预措施对缓解延迟性肌肉酸痛的影响:一项随机对照试验

阅读:1

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of various recovery interventions in alleviating delayed-onset muscle soreness (DOMS), focusing on the comparative effects of vibration therapy, functional electrical stimulation (FES), static stretching, massage therapy, and cold-water immersion (CWI). METHODS: This randomized controlled trial (RCT) was conducted at the university's physical training center from September 2024 to October. A total of 30 healthy male university students were recruited and randomly assigned to six groups, with five participants in each group. Healthy students were recruited via public announcements and randomly assigned to 6 groups: massage therapy (Group A), CMI (Group B), vibration therapy (Group C), static stretching (Group D), FES (Group E), and control (Group F). After DOMS was induced in the quadriceps, participants received the designated recovery interventions. Assessments were conducted at baseline, immediately post-exercise, and at 24, 48, and 72 h, including tensiomyography (TMG), pressure pain threshold (PPT), knee joint range of motion (ROM), isokinetic strength (ISOK), and biochemical markers (CK, Ca(2+), IL-6). RESULTS: Thirty participants completed the study. Group C demonstrated the greatest improvement in contraction time (Tc) at 72 h (p < 0.05) and the most significant reduction in IL-6 levels (p < 0.01). Group E significantly enhanced peak concentric power recovery from 24 to 72 h (p < 0.001) and ranked second to Group B in early-phase IL-6 regulation (p < 0.05). Group D demonstrated a significant main effect on ROM recovery (F = 3.41, p < 0.05), while Group A most effectively reduced CK levels and stabilized Ca(2+) homeostasis (p < 0.05). All variables showed significant main effects of time (Tc: η (2) = 0.760; Dm: η (2) = 0.824; IL-6: η (2) = 0.854), with interaction effects noted for Dm (η (2) = 0.360) and peak concentric power (η (2) = 0.336). CONCLUSION: Vibration therapy effectively enhanced muscle responsiveness by reducing Tc. Massage therapy was most effective in reducing IL-6, CK, and Ca(2+) levels, alleviating muscle stiffness and soreness, and facilitating tissue repair. FES significantly increased PPT and muscle strength, mitigating DOMS-related pain and functional decline. Static stretching offered notable benefits in enhancing joint ROM, whereas CMI effectively suppressed early inflammatory responses.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。