Table 2.
Studies That Found Effects from Wearing CS During Exercise
| Study Potential Benefited Variable | Summary | Effects from CS | No Effects from CS |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ali et al 200710 Muscle soreness |
Experiment 2: CS decreased muscle soreness following each exercise bout, and 24 h after the 10 km time-trial; Performance was not influence by CS (P=0.15) |
Experiment 2: Lower perceived muscle soreness potential Individual improvements: 10 of the 14 Participants ran faster ~ 20 s |
Experiment 1: Distance covered on the multi-stage fitness Shuttle running test HRmean Perceived muscle soreness RPE Experiment 2: Time to complete 10 km time-trial (mean) Time to complete 1st and 2nd 5 km partial time RPE |
| Ali et al 201111 Muscle fatigue |
CS worn (low and medium compression) resulted in greater maintenance of leg power after 10 km, but performance on 10 km did not | Vertical jump height higher (from pre-to post-10 km running) when wearing Low (12–15 mm Hg) and Med (18–21 mm Hg) CS | Time to complete 10 km RPE HRmean High (23–32 mm Hg) CS had no benefit for vertical jump post-10 km |
| Berry et al 198713 Lactate recovery |
CS did not affect the VO2max, recovery of VO2max, but blood lactate was lower on the recovery period when CS was worn during incremental treadmill test until exhaustion | Lower blood lactate after the incremental test (at 15 min of the recovery period) | VO2max Time to exhaustion recovery of VO2max |
| Bieuzen et al 201414 Muscle soreness Muscle fatigue-recovery |
CS improved post-exercise recovery (perceived leg soreness and muscle function); CS did not influence the performance (15.6 km in mountainous terrain) and markers of muscle damage/inflammation | Lower perceived muscle soreness Higher isometric peak torque and MVC (knee extensors) at 1 h (ES small) and 24 h post-run All recovery periods on CMJ (ES large) |
Time to complete 15.6 km RPE HR responses CK and interleukin-6 levels |
| Brophy-Williams et al 201915 Subsequent performance |
CS did not affect immediate performance, but had a positive impact on subsequent performance (1 h later) | Lower decrement from TT1 to TT2 (~9.5 s vs control) on time to complete 5 km | Time to complete TT1 (5 km) Time to complete TT2 (5 km) Oxygen consumption Blood lactate Cross sectional area of calf RPE Perceived muscle soreness Perceived fatigue Perceived recovery |
| Gimenes et al 201917 Muscle soreness Acute performance |
CS minimized the increment of local muscle soreness in the 2nd match (two soccer matches with 72 h in-between); CS also improved performance in high-intensity activities during the matches | Minimized the increment of muscle soreness on match 2; Higher distances covered > 19.1 km.h1 and ≥ 23 km.h−1 on match 1 higher distances covered between 19.1 and 22.99 km.h−1 on match 2 |
Match 1 Perceived soreness and recovery RPE HRmean, HRpeak Internal load (RPE x minutes played) Sprints repetitions Distances covered in total and below 19.1 km.h−1 Match 2 Perceived recovery RPE HRmean, HRpeak Internal load (RPE x minutes played) Sprints repetitions Distances covered in total and below 19.1 km.h−1 |
| Kemmler et al 200918 Acute performance Anaerobic threshold |
CS improved running performance and metabolic indicators (anaerobic threshold) | Time under load** (ES 0.40) Total work (ES: 0.30) Running at the anaerobic (ES: 0.22) And aerobic thresholds (ES: 0.28) |
VO2max Maximal lactate concentration HRmax Pulmonary ventilation Ventilator equivalent Respiratory exchange ratio |
| Menetrier et al 201119 Oxygen saturation at recovery |
CS did not improve performance, however CS increased calf tissue oxygen saturation at rest and during recovery from exercise | Increased calf tissue oxygen saturation at rest (before exercise): + 6.4±1.9% And during recovery: + 7.4±1.7% and + 10.7 ± 1.8% at 20th And 30th min of the last recovery period, respectively |
Times to exhaustion performed HRmean HRmax RPE |
| Miyamoto et al 201120 Muscle fatigue |
CS had no effect on the decline of MVC, but the extent of reduction of the evoked triplet torque was smaller when wearing CS with a high compression pressure | The decline of the MPF in the CS 30 mmHg was significantly smaller than that in 0 mmHg (control) | Reduction of the MVC torque after the calf-raise among 0 (control), 18 and 30 mmHg CS EMG amplitude during the MVC was decreased, the extent to which was not significantly different among the three Conditions both for the medial gastrocnemius and soleus M-wave amplitude (evoked contraction) |
| Pavin et al 201921 Muscle fatigue |
CS positively influenced agility and lower limb muscular endurance performances following a soccer match | After-match kept the time to complete T-test Agility (control performed slower) from baseline Control presented greater decrement after-match (ES = 1.27 control vs. CS) in the heel-rise test repetitions from baseline |
Distance covered in the Yo-Yo intermittent endurance level 2 after match HRmean, peak and %peak RPE |
| Rider et al 201422 **worst acute performance Lactate recovery |
CS did not improve running performance, but seem to improve recovery after exercise | Time to fatigue lower in CS (**negative) Blood lactate lower during recovery (1 and 5 min) |
HR blood lactate (during the maximal treadmill test) lactate threshold VO2max Respiratory exchange ratio RPE |
| Rimaud et al 201023 Lactate recovery |
CS did not improve performance during graded maximal exercise but lead to a higher contribution of anaerobic glycolysis and improved lactate removal during passive recovery. However, CS efficacy is highly limited | Higher blood lactate value at exhaustion Lactate removal ability was improved (during passive recovery) |
Submaximal/maximal HR VO2 Performance (W on VO2max) SBP RPE |
| Treseler et al 201625 Muscle soreness |
CS decreased muscle soreness (24 h post-run) in lower extremities, (but not for calf) and presented higher RPE (feelings of working harder with CS); CS did not influence 5 km performance (P=0.74) | Lower perceived muscle soreness 24 h later Potential individual improvement (10 of 19 participants ran faster ~10 s) |
Time to complete 5 km time-trial (mean) HR responses Rate of perceived recovery |
| Varela-Sanz et al 201126 (experiment 2) Acute lower cardiac stress |
CS resulted in lower cardiac stress during a test at competition pace, but none effects for performance and other physiological and perceptual indicators | Lower HR response during a test at competition pace (ie, 105% best 10 km run) | Time to fatigue HRpeak Blood lactate RPE VO2 peak speed %VO2 max Running economy |
| Zadow et al 201829 Lower fibrinolytic activity |
CS significantly reduced post-marathon fibrinolytic activity | Lower D-Dimer concentrations post-marathon | Marathon finishing times Thrombin–anti-thrombin complex tissue factor Tissue factor pathway inhibitor |
Notes: **Time under load means the maximal amount of minutes performed at a submaximal speed (ie, 9 to 11 km.h−1) to ensure over 30 mins running.
Abbreviations: CMJ, countermovement jumps; CS, compression stockings; ES Cohen’s d, effect size; HR, heart rate; MVC, maximal voluntary contraction; RPE, rating of perceived exertion; TT, time-trial.