Impact of different doses of cold water immersion (duration and temperature variations) on recovery from acute exercise-induced muscle damage: a network meta-analysis
Wang H, Wang L, Pan Y
Frontiers in physiology · 9 citations
How it was studied
- Design
- Systematic review (indexed by PubMed)
- Studied in
- People
- Main outcome
- Health markers and function
Who paid for it
- Funding
- Independent funding
Based on full-text disclosure statement.
Publication
- Published
- 2025-02-26 · Front Physiol · vol. 16 · p. 1525726
- Publisher
- Frontiers Media
- Cited
- 15 citations · more than 97% of similar papers · 6.4× the field average
- Impact
- Top 10% most cited in its field
- References
- 89 works
- Access
- Open access (journal) · CC-BY
- Research areas
- Exercise and Physiological Responses · Thermoregulation and physiological responses · Cardiovascular and exercise physiology
- Keywords
- Muscle damage, Meta-analysis, Medicine, Immersion (mathematics), Physical medicine and rehabilitation, Internal medicine, Physical therapy
3 authors
From CN
- Hai WangCapital University of Physical Education and Sports
- Lu WangCapital University of Physical Education and Sports
- Yingxu PanCapital University of Physical Education and Sports
Abstract
Objective
This network meta-analysis and systematic review evaluated the recovery impacts of varying cold water immersion (CWI) protocols on acute exercise-induced muscle damage.
Methods
We searched CNKI, PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Embase from January 2000 to September 2024 for randomized controlled trials examining CWI's recovery effects on acute muscle damage. Data extraction, study screening, and risk of bias assessment were conducted independently by two reviewers. Analyses were performed using Stata 16.0.
Results
A total of 55 RCTs were included, with 42 reporting delayed onset muscle soreness (DOMS), 36 reporting jump performance (JUMP), and 30 reporting creatine kinase (CK) levels. Network meta-analysis showed that compared with the control group, MD-MT-CWI: Medium-duration medium-temperature cold water immersion (10-15 min, 11°C-15°C) [SMD = -1.45, 95%CI(-2.13, -0.77), P < 0.01] and MD-LT-CWI: Medium-duration low-temperature cold water immersion (10-15 min, 5°C-10°C) [SMD = -1.12, 95%CI(-1.78, -0.47), P = 0.01] significantly reduced DOMS; MD-LT-CWI (10-15 min, 5°C-10°C) [SMD = 0.48, 95%CI(0.20, 0.77), P = 0.01] and MD-MT-CWI (10-15 min, 11°C-15°C) [SMD = 0.42, 95%CI(0.15, 0.70), P = 0.02] significantly improved JUMP; MD-MT-CWI (10-15 min, 11°C-15°C) [SMD = -0.85, 95%CI(-1.36, -0.35), P = 0.01] and MD-LT-CWI (10-15 min, 5°C-10°C) [SMD = -0.90, 95%CI(-1.46, -0.34), P = 0.02] significantly reduced CK. Cumulative probability ranking showed that MD-LT-CWI (10-15 min, 5°C-10°C) was the most effective for improving JUMP and reducing CK, while MD-MT-CWI (10-15 min, 11°C-15°C) was the most effective for reducing DOMS.
Conclusion
Different dosages of cold water immersion (varying in duration and temperature) had different effects on recovery from acute exercise-induced muscle damage. We found that MD-LT-CWI (10-15 min, 5°C-10°C) was most effective for improving biochemical markers (CK) and neuromuscular recovery, while MD-MT-CWI (10-15 min, 11°C-15°C) was most effective for reducing muscle soreness. In practice, we recommend using MD-LT-CWI (10-15 min, 5°C-10°C) and MD-MT-CWI (10-15 min, 11°C-15°C) to reduce Exercise-induced muscle damage (EIMD). However, due to the limitations of the included studies, further high-quality studies are needed to verify these conclusions.
Systematic review registration
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD42024602359.
Abstract via Europe PMC. Copyright remains with the authors or publisher (CC BY).
Community trust
Loading…
How much do you trust this study's findings?
Comments
Sign in to rate, comment on or flag this study.Sign inSomething 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 inEducational information about published research. Not medical advice, and not a recommendation to start or stop anything.