RESUMO
In athletic populations, compression socks (CS) may improve exercise performance recovery. However, their potential to improve performance and/or recovery following exercise in non-athletic populations is unknown. Our study evaluated the effects of CS on exercise performance and recovery from a graded maximal treadmill test. Insufficiently active adults (n = 10, 60% female, average physical activity ~60 minutes/week) performed two graded maximal exercise tests; one while wearing below-knee CS, and the other trial with regular socks (CON). Order of trials was randomized. For both trials, heart rate, lactate, and rating of perceived exertion were measured at each stage and at one, five, and ten-minutes post-exercise. Additionally, recovery variables (soreness, tightness, annoyingness, tenderness, pulling) were measured at 24 and 48 hours post-exercise using a visual analog scale. Paired-samples t-tests were used to compare exercise and recovery variables between CS and CON trials. Heart rate, lactate, and rating of perceived exertion were not different between trials for any stage during the exercise test or immediate recovery. Most 24-and 48-hour recovery variables were significantly improved after the CS trial, with values 34.6 - 42.3% lower at 24 hours and 40.3 - 61.4% lower at 48 hours compared to CON. Compression socks provided a significant and meaningful improvement in recovery variables 24-48 hours following maximal exercise. Therefore, CS may remove a common barrier to exercise adherence and facilitate more effective training recovery for insufficiently active adults.
RESUMO
ABSTRACT: Rider, BC, Conger, SA, Ditzenberger, GL, Besteman, SS, Bouret, CM, and Coughlin, AM. Examining the accuracy of the Polar A360 monitor. J Strength Cond Res 35(8): 2165-2169, 2021-The purpose of this study was to determine the accuracy of the Polar A360 heart rate (HR) monitor during periods of rest, walking/running, and active/passive recovery from exercise. Thirty collegiate athletes (women n = 15 and men n = 15) wore an A360 monitor and a previously validated chest HR monitor (Polar RS400) that served as the criterion measurement across a range of resting and walking/running intensities. First, subjects rested in a supine, seated, and standing position. Next, each subject walked on a treadmill at 1.6 kilometers per hour (kph). Speed was increased by 1.6 kph every 2 minutes until volitional fatigue. Then, subjects walked at 4.8 kph followed by a seated recovery stage. Heart rate was recorded in 30-second increments. Total mean difference in HR readings, percent accuracy, and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) analysis established the level of agreement between devices. Bland-Altman plots and a regression were used to examine the agreement between devices. The A360 demonstrated a strong correlation with the RS400 (r2 = 0.98) across time points. The analysis of variance with repeated measures indicated an overall significant difference (p < 0.001) between devices. The A360 significantly underestimated HR during the 6.4-kph speed only (p < 0.05) (effect size 0.26). The greatest percent accuracy occurred during rest (91%) and recovery (90%). An ICC of 0.98 (SEM: 0.35) demonstrates a strong level of agreement between devices. The A360 is accurate at rest and during various walking and running speeds and thus is a device that can be used with confidence by athletes for specific training purposes. Future research should examine accuracy during weight training and other sport-specific activities.
