Marmara University School of Physical Education and Sport, Turkey.
Biol Sport. 2012 Dec;29(4):269-75. doi: 10.5604/20831862.1019664. Epub 2012 Nov 15.
In this study we assessed the influence of the three different recovery interventions massage (MSG), electrical muscle stimulation (EMS), and passive rest (PR) on lactate disappearance and muscle recovery after exhausting exercise bouts. Twelve healthy male sport students participated in the study. They attended the laboratory on five test days. After measurement of [Formula: see text]O2max and a baseline Wingate test (WGb), the three recovery interventions were tested in random counterbalanced order. High intensity exercise, which consisted of six exhausting exercise bouts (interspersed with active recovery), was followed by MSG, EMS or PR application (24 minutes); then the final Wingate test (WGf) was performed. Lactate, heart rate, peak and mean power, rating of perceived exertion (RPE), and total quality of recovery (TQR) were recorded. In WGf mean power was significantly higher than in WGb for all three recovery modalities (MSG 6.29%, EMS 5.33%, PR 4.84% increase, p < 0.05), but no significant differences in mean and peak power were observed between the three recovery modes (p > 0.05). The heart rate response and the changes in blood lactate concentration were identical in all three interventions during the entire protocol (p = 0.817, p = 0.493, respectively). RPE and TQR scores were also not different among the three interventions (p > 0.05). These results provide further evidence that MSG and EMS are not more effective than PR in the process of recovery from high intensity exercise.
在这项研究中,我们评估了三种不同的恢复干预措施(按摩、电肌肉刺激和被动休息)对耗尽运动后的乳酸清除和肌肉恢复的影响。12 名健康的男性运动学生参加了这项研究。他们在五个测试日到实验室报到。在测量最大摄氧量和基线式瓦格纳测试(WGb)后,以随机交叉平衡的顺序测试了三种恢复干预措施。高强度运动由六次耗尽运动(穿插主动恢复)组成,随后进行按摩、电肌肉刺激或被动休息(24 分钟);然后进行最终的瓦格纳测试(WGf)。记录了乳酸、心率、峰值和平均功率、感知用力等级(RPE)和总恢复质量(TQR)。在 WGf 中,与三种恢复方式的 WGb 相比,平均功率均显著升高(MSG 升高 6.29%、EMS 升高 5.33%、PR 升高 4.84%,p<0.05),但三种恢复模式之间的平均和峰值功率没有显著差异(p>0.05)。在整个方案中,三种干预措施的心率反应和血液乳酸浓度的变化完全相同(p=0.817,p=0.493)。RPE 和 TQR 评分在三种干预措施之间也没有差异(p>0.05)。这些结果进一步证明,在高强度运动后的恢复过程中,按摩和电肌肉刺激并不比被动休息更有效。