Use the Back button in your browser to see the other results of your search or to select another record.
| Photobiomodulation by LED does not alter muscle recovery indicators and presents similar outcomes to cold-water immersion and active recovery |
| Malta EDS, de Lira FS, Machado FA, Zago AS, do Amaral SL, Zagatto AM |
| Frontiers in Physiology 2019 Jan 14;10(1948):Epub |
| clinical trial |
| 3/10 [Eligibility criteria: No; Random allocation: Yes; Concealed allocation: No; Baseline comparability: No; Blind subjects: No; Blind therapists: No; Blind assessors: No; Adequate follow-up: No; Intention-to-treat analysis: No; Between-group comparisons: Yes; Point estimates and variability: Yes. Note: Eligibility criteria item does not contribute to total score] *This score has been confirmed* |
|
PURPOSE: The aim of the present study was to investigate the effectiveness of photobiomodulation therapy (PBMT) on muscle recovery based on inflammation (interleukin-10, IL-10; tumor necrosis factor-alpha, TNFalpha), muscle damage markers (creatine kinase, CK; lactate dehydrogenase, LDH), delay onset muscle soreness (DOMS), and countermovement jump performance (CMJ) after two sprint interval training (SIT) sessions compared with a placebo condition (part-I), as well as to compare the effectiveness of PBMT with active recovery (AR) and cold-water immersion (CWI)(part-II). METHODS: Part-I was conducted as a double-blind, randomized and placebo-controlled study and part-II as a parallel-group study. Thirty-six men participated in the studies (12 participants in part-I and 36 participants in part-II). Volunteers performed two SITs interspaced by 24-hours (SIT1 and SIT2) to mimic the effect of accumulating 2 consecutive days of SIT. In part-I, only after SIT2, PBMT (total energy 600 J (300 J per leg in 5 spots); wavelength 660 to 850 nm) or placebo interventions were performed, while in part-II PBMT (part-I data), AR (15-min; 50% of the maximal aerobic power), or CWI (10-min; 10 degrees C) were carried out, also after SIT2. Blood samples were collected before (ie, baseline), and 0.5, 1, 24, 48, and 72-h after SIT2, while CMJ and DOMS were measured before, 24, 48, and 72-h after SIT2. RESULTS: In part-I, there were no interactions between PBMT and placebo conditions for any blood markers (p >= 0.313), DOMS (p = 0.052), and CMJ (p = 0.295). However, an effect of time was found with increases in LDH, CK, and IL-10 (p <= 0.043) as well as a decrease in DOMS at 72-h compared with 24-h (p = 0.012). In part-II, there were no interactions between the PBMT, AR, and CWI groups for any markers at the same moments (p >= 0.189) and for the peak and integral values (p >= 0.193), for DOMS (p = 0.314) and CMJ (p = 0.264). However, an effect of time was found with an increase in CK and IL-10 (p = 0.003), while DOMS decreased at 48 and 72-hours compared with 24-hours (p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: In summary, PBMT had no effect on inflammation, muscle damage, CMJ performance, or DOMS after two consecutive sprint interval training sessions compared to placebo, CWI, and AR strategies.
|