Active recovery affects the recovery of the corticospinal system but not of muscle contractile properties.

PURPOSE:Active recovery is often used by athletes after strenuous exercise or competition but its underlying mechanisms are not well understood. We hypothesized that active recovery speeds-up recovery processes within the muscle and the central nervous system (CNS). METHODS:We assessed muscular and...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Louis-Solal Giboin, Ehsan Amiri, Raphael Bertschinger, Markus Gruber
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2018-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC5951565?pdf=render
id doaj-5cc6dff5112d4fc28a97bc23a1194cc4
record_format Article
spelling doaj-5cc6dff5112d4fc28a97bc23a1194cc42020-11-25T01:24:20ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032018-01-01135e019733910.1371/journal.pone.0197339Active recovery affects the recovery of the corticospinal system but not of muscle contractile properties.Louis-Solal GiboinEhsan AmiriRaphael BertschingerMarkus GruberPURPOSE:Active recovery is often used by athletes after strenuous exercise or competition but its underlying mechanisms are not well understood. We hypothesized that active recovery speeds-up recovery processes within the muscle and the central nervous system (CNS). METHODS:We assessed muscular and CNS recovery by measuring the voluntary activation (VA) in the vastus lateralis muscle with transcranial magnetic stimulation (VATMS) and peripheral nerve stimulation (VAPNS) during maximal voluntary contractions (MVC) of the knee extensors in 11 subjects. Measurements were performed before and after a fatiguing cycling time-trial, after an active and a passive recovery treatment and after another fatiguing task (1 min MVC). The measurements were performed a second time 24 h after the time-trial. RESULTS:We observed a time × group interaction effect for VATMS (p = 0.013). Post-hoc corrected T-tests demonstrated an increased VATMS after active recovery when measured after the 1 min MVC performed 24 h after the time-trial (mean ± SD; 95.2 ± 4.1% vs. 89.2 ± 6.6%, p = 0.026). No significant effects were observed for all other variables. CONCLUSIONS:Active recovery increased aspects of central, rather than muscle recovery. However, no effect on MVC was seen, implying that even if active recovery speeds up CNS recovery, without affecting the recovery of muscle contractile properties, this doesn´t translate into increases in overall performance.http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC5951565?pdf=render
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Louis-Solal Giboin
Ehsan Amiri
Raphael Bertschinger
Markus Gruber
spellingShingle Louis-Solal Giboin
Ehsan Amiri
Raphael Bertschinger
Markus Gruber
Active recovery affects the recovery of the corticospinal system but not of muscle contractile properties.
PLoS ONE
author_facet Louis-Solal Giboin
Ehsan Amiri
Raphael Bertschinger
Markus Gruber
author_sort Louis-Solal Giboin
title Active recovery affects the recovery of the corticospinal system but not of muscle contractile properties.
title_short Active recovery affects the recovery of the corticospinal system but not of muscle contractile properties.
title_full Active recovery affects the recovery of the corticospinal system but not of muscle contractile properties.
title_fullStr Active recovery affects the recovery of the corticospinal system but not of muscle contractile properties.
title_full_unstemmed Active recovery affects the recovery of the corticospinal system but not of muscle contractile properties.
title_sort active recovery affects the recovery of the corticospinal system but not of muscle contractile properties.
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
series PLoS ONE
issn 1932-6203
publishDate 2018-01-01
description PURPOSE:Active recovery is often used by athletes after strenuous exercise or competition but its underlying mechanisms are not well understood. We hypothesized that active recovery speeds-up recovery processes within the muscle and the central nervous system (CNS). METHODS:We assessed muscular and CNS recovery by measuring the voluntary activation (VA) in the vastus lateralis muscle with transcranial magnetic stimulation (VATMS) and peripheral nerve stimulation (VAPNS) during maximal voluntary contractions (MVC) of the knee extensors in 11 subjects. Measurements were performed before and after a fatiguing cycling time-trial, after an active and a passive recovery treatment and after another fatiguing task (1 min MVC). The measurements were performed a second time 24 h after the time-trial. RESULTS:We observed a time × group interaction effect for VATMS (p = 0.013). Post-hoc corrected T-tests demonstrated an increased VATMS after active recovery when measured after the 1 min MVC performed 24 h after the time-trial (mean ± SD; 95.2 ± 4.1% vs. 89.2 ± 6.6%, p = 0.026). No significant effects were observed for all other variables. CONCLUSIONS:Active recovery increased aspects of central, rather than muscle recovery. However, no effect on MVC was seen, implying that even if active recovery speeds up CNS recovery, without affecting the recovery of muscle contractile properties, this doesn´t translate into increases in overall performance.
url http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC5951565?pdf=render
work_keys_str_mv AT louissolalgiboin activerecoveryaffectstherecoveryofthecorticospinalsystembutnotofmusclecontractileproperties
AT ehsanamiri activerecoveryaffectstherecoveryofthecorticospinalsystembutnotofmusclecontractileproperties
AT raphaelbertschinger activerecoveryaffectstherecoveryofthecorticospinalsystembutnotofmusclecontractileproperties
AT markusgruber activerecoveryaffectstherecoveryofthecorticospinalsystembutnotofmusclecontractileproperties
_version_ 1725117852566945792