4.3 Article

Under Pressure: The Chronic Effects of Lower-Body Compression Garment Use during a 6-Week Military Training Course

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19073912

关键词

recovery; physical training; performance; blood-flow; soreness; DOMS

资金

  1. New Zealand Defence Force, Joint Support Group

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study found that wearing compression garments during a 6-week military training regime can slightly improve muscle soreness and provide some benefits to certain aspects of physical performance, although these improvements are not statistically significant.
Background: Previous studies have shown that compression garments may aid recovery in acute settings; however, less is known about the long-term use of compression garments (CG) for recovery. This study aimed to assess the influence of wearing CG on changes in physical performance, subjective soreness, and sleep quality over 6 weeks of military training. Methods: Fifty-five officer-trainees aged 24 +/- 6 y from the New Zealand Defence Force participated in the current study. Twenty-seven participants wore CG every evening for 4-6 h, and twenty-eight wore standard military attire (CON) over a 6-week period. Subjective questionnaires (soreness and sleep quality) were completed weekly, and 2.4 km run time-trial, maximum press-ups, and curl-ups were tested before and after the 6 weeks of military training. Results: Repeated measures ANOVA indicated no significant group x time interactions for performance measures (p > 0.05). However, there were small effects in favour of CG over CON for improvements in 2.4 km run times (d = -0.24) and press-ups (d = 0.36), respectively. Subjective soreness also resulted in no significant group x time interaction but displayed small to moderate effects for reduced soreness in favour of CG. Conclusions: Though not statistically significant, CG provided small to moderate benefits to muscle-soreness and small benefits to aspects of physical-performance over a 6-week military training regime.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据