Author(s): WELLAUER, V., CLIJSEN, R., BIANCHI, G., HOHENAUER, E., Institution: UNIVERSITY OF APPLIED SCIENCES AND ARTS OF SOUTHERN SWITZERLAND (SUPSI), Country: SWITZERLAND, Abstract-ID: 1233

INTRODUCTION:
Exercise-induced muscle damage (EIMD) can result from unaccustomed or high-intensity eccentric exercise and is typically evaluated using objective and subjective markers of recovery. Cold- and hot water immersion (CWI and HWI, respectively) have emerged as potential post-exercise recovery interventions to accelerate recovery between training sessions or competitive events, but there is still a lack of evidence, especially in the female population. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the acute physiological changes and assess the effectiveness of repeated CWI and HWI in enhancing recovery in women compared to a passive control group (CON).
METHODS:
30 healthy women (23.4 ±2.9 years), randomly assigned to CWI, HWI or CON groups, completed a standardised EIMD protocol. Immediately and 120min after the EIMD, participants underwent a 10min recovery intervention (CWI, HWI, or CON). To assess acute physiological responses, muscle oxygen saturation (SmO2), core and skin temperature were recorded at baseline, after muscle damage, directly after the recovery intervention (postInt) and during a 30min follow-up period. Recovery was evaluated by assessing maximal voluntary isometric contraction of the knee extensors, muscle swelling, delayed onset of muscle soreness, and creatine kinase at baseline, 24, 48 and 72h following EIMD.
RESULTS:
SmO2 was significantly lower in CWI than HWI (20min: 67.8 ± 2.7% vs. 74.7 ± 3.2%, p = .006; 30min: 64.4 ± 6.4% vs. 74.4 ± 3.9%, p = .001) and CWI compared to CON (20min: 73.5 ± 6.6%, p = .026; 30min: 73.0 ± 6.1%, p = .006). Core temperature was significantly higher in HWI compared to CWI at postInt and 30min (both p < .01) and compared to CON at postInt and throughout 30min follow-up (all p < .05), while there was no difference (p > .05) between CWI and CON. Skin temperature was significantly reduced in CWI compared to HWI (all p < .001) and compared to CON (all p< .05) between postInt and 30min follow-up. No significant differences were observed between CWI and HWI in objective and subjective markers of recovery throughout 72h follow-up.
CONCLUSION:
Despite acute physiological changes, neither CWI nor HWI improved subjective and objective recovery characteristics during a 72h follow-up period compared to the CON group.