Original article written by Freddie Brown, Jessica Hill and Charles Pedlar
Background
In order to deal with competition intensity and density increasing across sports,[1,2] the importance for recovery has also seen a rise in utility, application and discussion. Many active strategies exist alongside key foundational considerations such as adequate and appropriate nutrition. Compression garments (CGs) as a passive strategy have been long-reported in the research[3] – and utilised by athletes – as a recovery strategy post-competition or heavy training session. Despite the common utility of CGs for recovery, there is still debate as to the mechanisms and the effect of the pressure of CGs. The perceived benefit from athletes using CGs must also be strongly considered.[4]
What the authors did
The authors reviewed the literature of CGs, and consolidated current evidence on the “optimal” pressure of CGs for recovery. They specifically refer to research exploring recovery from exercise-induced muscle damage (EIMD). The authors explored a number of key points from the literature in relation to CGs:
- Quantifying garment pressures
- Evidence of a dose-response relationship between pressure and exercise recovery
- Dose responses and the physiological effects of compression — implications for potential mechanisms
- The association between improved recovery and reductions in limb swelling
- Proposed mechanisms for compression-mediated recovery
What the authors found
Much of the current research to date fails to report specific garment pressure, relying on manufacturer specifications. Alongside this – in practical terms – there are of course such high individual variations in body type and size which most people fail to account for with specific sizing, and athletes tend to wear generic sizes that are commercially available, which may not apply sufficient pressure for recovery. Research has reported that standard sized CGs provided no benefits when compared to sham – supporting the notion that lower pressures applied were suboptimal for recovery purposes. The authors of this review also propose that there may be an optimal pressure for supporting recovery, where by too much pressure could have negative effects through athlete-perceived discomfort.
However, compared to sham and sports CGs, wearing custom-fitted garments improved 24 hour recovery by 9.4% and 5.9% more, respectively, and also improved 48 hour recovery by 9.1% and 9.7% more, respectively. Recovery was measured using knee-extension isometric strength and CK levels, which were attenuated with custom-fitted garments throughout recovery. The conclusions from this review are consistent with new research in rugby union highlighting that only custom-fitted CGs enhance recovery, compared to standard sized garments or sham ultrasound therapy.[5]
Limitations
Of course, CGs are only one recovery strategy option and must be considered as a holistic recovery approach alongside competition & sport context, time of season, athletic capability, sleep, nutrition, and other strategies.
It is also still unknown the effects (if any) that CGs may have on adaptation. Similar to the reports of cold water immersion impairing strength training adaptations, it could be speculated that CGs have a similar suppressing effect as they also support reduction in inflammation. Research to date has only explored the acute recovery effect of compression.
What this means for coaches
- Compression garments (CGs), particularly those that are custom-fitted or apply enough pressure, can offer positive recovery benefits to athletes.
- There is likely an optimal level pressure that needs to be decided in harmony with the scientific evidence and the athlete’s individual preference.
- CGs should be considered as one recovery tool “in the toolbox” of strategies that can be utilised to enhance recovery from exercise and competition.
- CGs cannot be ruled out as an effective strategy due to the dearth of negative evidence, the abundance of perceptually positive impact from athletes, and growing evidence for custom-fitted CGs.
Reviewer’s comments
- Custom fit compression garments demonstrate higher pressure and lower variance of pressure, compared to standard compression garments that demonstrate lower pressure and much higher variance between athletes.
- The findings from this paper support previous research suggesting that compression can be effective in enhancing recovery (particularly from resistance exercise), and at time points >24 hours.
- There has been no research that has reported negative effects of compression garments on recovery.
- There is currently no research exploring the effect of compression on muscle adaptation. There is an opportunity for practitioners to conduct highly informative and novel research on the medium-long term effects of a commonly used recovery strategy on athlete adaptation.
- Collaboration with companies and research institutions to provide custom-fitted compression garments will likely provide the best recovery for athletes, and also support further research on compression for recovery.
Recommended resources
- Article – Athlete recovery: Putting the fundamentals in place – Jonathan Leeder
- Podcast – Recovery, sleep & nutrition; the other 22 hours – Peter Tierney and Chris Rosimus
- Article – Post-exercise recovery: Cooling and heating, a periodized approach – Robin Thorpe