Original article written by Cedric Leduc, Dan Weaving, Cameron Owen and colleagues
Background
Scheduling recovery strategies around training and competition can be a challenge given congested match-demand, the need for accelerated recovery between sessions and potentially late competition times. Often, late competition times – coupled with an athlete and coaches desire to perform active recovery in an attempt to accelerate recovery – can reduce an athlete’s sleep window (or sleep opportunity). It is also known that athletes can struggle with poor sleep quality and quantity following match-play and training.
What the authors did
The authors aimed to determine the effect of sleep extension against an early morning active recovery session on physical and perceptual recovery variables. They recruited 10 male rugby union athletes (age: 21.0 ± 1.3 years; height: 179.9 ± 5.4 cm; body mass: 89.2 ± 15.4 kg) competing in university rugby. Participants completed a standardised contact session, which has previously shown to elicit significant fatigue. Participants completed either an active recovery session in the morning following the evening session, or were assigned to the sleep extension intervention. All participants did both sleep extension and active recovery in a crossover design. The average time in bed for the extension was 9 hours and 19 minutes, compared to 6 hours and 1 minute for the active recovery group. Nutrition was controlled during the study, in an attempt to reduce cofounding effects on recovery.
What the authors found
As expected, the sleep extension group did in fact result in longer sleep time and time in bed. However, the authors report a higher fragmentation index (%) and higher wake-after sleep onset in the sleep extension group. Results of the current study demonstrate that after 36 hours – there were no significant differences in both sleep extension and active recovery groups. Interventions may have acute effects, and recovery strategies must be prescribed based on the individual and turnarounds associated at that time in the season. For example, if training is a requirement in close succession (i.e., the day after) of a match, it might be advisable to allow for a sleep extension window.
It is interesting to note that participants in the sleep extension group were only able to increase their total sleep time by ~1 hour, despite having a much longer sleep window. Other research has reported similar findings, and the authors suggest that this might be difficult to extend or change sleep by a greater degree as a result of existing circadian rhythms. The authors also describe a potential impact on Night 2 of sleep after sleep extension, with wake after sleep onset being heightened again. It may actually be more beneficial to maintain circadian rhythm in keeping wake times consistent, but allowing for a sleep extension via afternoon nap opportunities.
Limitations
- It is hard to determine the exact effect of sleep extension – and as the authors themselves have stated, it would be valuable to also have the group which were afforded the sleep extension window to also complete the active recovery strategy.
- It is also unknown whether or not multiple sleep extension windows would have a larger effect on recovery over multiple days.
What this means for coaches
- Allowing athletes an extended sleep window (instead of awakening early for active recovery) might improve cognitive function the morning after fatiguing training, which has strong implications when scheduling recovery and training after evening exercise.
- Since both sleep extension and active recovery were as effective after 36 hours, it is highly likely important that the recovery strategy you chose as a practitioner is dependent on the goals you have, and athlete preference. Analysing chronotypes and dividing athletes into morning and evening types may help with deciding the strategies that are best suited to individuals.
- Since sleep extension may have disrupted sleep the following night, it may be advisable that athletes maintain their normal wake up time and are given a choice of a nap opportunity during the day to make up for potential reduction in total sleep time.
Reviewer’s comment
- This is a very well-constructed research study with strong practical take-aways. The authors have compared 2 scenarios that are often debated within multi-disciplinary teams – particularly during heavy training periods or dense-fixture periods.
- This study further highlights just how complex ‘recovery’ is, and how it is not just as simple as recommending athletes “just sleep in”, or the assumption that sleep extension is simply better than another strategy. The effects of recovery and different modalities are likely highly individual and may have varying effects on different athletes.
- Recovery is likely not a ‘one or the other’ approach when it comes to strategies, and the optimal recovery for athletes likely lies in a balanced approach using a combination of sleep, nutrition, active strategies and reduction of overall stress.
Recommended resources
- Read – Sleep and recovery in team sport: Current sleep-related issues facing professional team-sport athletes – Hugh Fullagar et al.
- Read – The effects of sleep extension on the athletic performance of collegiate basketball players – Cheri Mah et al.
- Watch – Sleep and athletic performance – Anna West, Luke Gupta, Jordan Milsom