Randomized controlled trial2012

Effects of cold water immersion and active recovery on post-exercise heart rate variability

Bastos FN, Vanderlei LC, Nakamura FY, Bertollo M, Godoy MF, Hoshi RA, Junior JN, Pastre CM

International journal of sports medicine · 30 citations

Review labels

Funding not disclosed

Neutral facts our review recorded about how this study was done. They describe method, never whether we like the result.

How it was studied

Design
Randomized controlled trial (indexed by PubMed)
Studied in
People
Main outcome
Health markers and function

Who paid for it

Funding
Funding not disclosed

Publication

Published
2012-06-21 · Int J Sports Med · vol. 33 · issue 11 · pp. 873–879
Publisher
Thieme Medical Publishers (Germany)
Cited
71 citations · more than 86% of similar papers · 1.7× the field average
References
40 works
Access
Paywalled
Research areas
Heart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control · Cardiovascular and exercise physiology · Exercise and Physiological Responses
Keywords
Medicine, Blood lactate, Heart rate variability, Heart rate, Cardiology, Internal medicine, Mathematics, Animal science, Blood pressure
MeSH
humans, lactic acid, exercise test, immersion, oxygen consumption, heart rate, running, time factors, male, cold temperature, young adult

8 authors

From BR, IT

  • Fábio do Nascimento BastosUniversidade Estadual do Norte do Paraná
  • Luiz Carlos Marques VanderleiUniversidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)
  • Fábio Yuzo NakamuraUniversidade Estadual de Londrina
  • Maurizio BertolloUniversity of Chieti-Pescara
  • Moacir Fernandes de GodoyFaculdade de Medicina de São José do Rio Preto
  • Rosângela Akemi HoshiUniversidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)

Abstract

The aim of the present study was to investigate the potential benefits of cold water immersion (CWI) and active recovery (AR) on blood lactate concentration ([Lac]) and heart rate variability (HRV) indices following high-intensity exercise. 20 male subjects were recruited. On the first visit, an incremental test was performed to determine maximal oxygen consumption and the associated speed (MAS). The remaining 3 visits for the performance of constant velocity exhaustive tests at MAS and different recovery methods (6 min) were separated by 7-day intervals [randomized: CWI, AR or passive recovery (PR)]. The CWI and AR lowered [Lac] (p<0.05) at 11, 13 and 15 min after exercise cessation in comparison to PR. There was a 'time' and 'recovery mode' interaction for 2 HRV indices: standard deviation of normal R-R intervals (SDNN) (partial eta squared=0.114) and natural log of low-frequency power density (lnLF) (partial eta squared=0.090). CWI presented significantly higher SDNN compared to PR at 15 min of recovery (p<0.05). In addition, greater SDNN values were found in CWI vs. AR during the application of recovery interventions, and at 30 and 75 min post-exercise (p<0.05 for all differences). The lnLF during the recovery interventions and at 75 min post-exercise was greater using CWI compared with AR (p<0.05). For square root of the mean of the sum of the squares of differences between adjacent R-R intervals (RMSSD) and natural log of high-frequency power density (lnHF), a moderate effect size was found between CWI and PR during the recovery interventions and at 15 min post-exercise. Our findings show that AR and CWI offer benefits regarding the removal of [Lac] following high-intensity exercise. While limited, CWI results in some improvement in post-exercise cardiac autonomic regulation compared to AR and PR. Further, AR is not recommended if the aim is to accelerate the parasympathetic reactivation.

Abstract via Europe PMC. Copyright remains with the authors or publisher.

Community trust

Loading…

How much do you trust this study's findings?

0 · not at all10 · completely

Comments

Sign in to rate, comment on or flag this study.Sign in

Something wrong here?

Flag this study if its information, labels or funding look wrong. An editor reviews every flag.

Sign in to rate, comment on or flag this study.Sign in

Educational information about published research. Not medical advice, and not a recommendation to start or stop anything.