1AIS Physiology, Australian Institute of Sport, Belconnen, ACT, AUSTRALIA; 2School of Medicine, Griffith Health Institute, Griffith University, Gold Coast, AUSTRALIA; 3Appleton Institute for Behavioural Science, Central Queensland University, Adelaide, AUSTRALIA; and 4Sport Performance Research Institute, Auckland University of Technology, Auckland, NEW ZEALAND.
Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2014 Aug;46(8):1631-9. doi: 10.1249/MSS.0000000000000268.
Cold water immersion (CWI) may be beneficial for acute recovery from exercise, but it may impair long-term performance by attenuating the stimuli responsible for adaptation to training. We compared effects of CWI and passive rest on cycling performance during a simulated cycling grand tour.
Thirty-four male endurance-trained competitive cyclists were randomized to CWI for four times per week for 15 min at 15°C or control (passive recovery) groups for 7 d of baseline training, 21 d of intensified training, and an 11-d taper. Criteria for completion of training and testing were satisfied by 10 cyclists in the CWI group (maximal aerobic power, 5.13 ± 0.21 W·kg; mean ± SD) and 11 in the control group (5.01 ± 0.41 W·kg). Each week, cyclists completed a high-intensity interval cycling test and two 4-min bouts separated by 30 min. CWI was performed four times per week for 15 min at 15°C.
Between baseline and taper, cyclists in the CWI group had an unclear change in overall 4-min power relative to control (2.7% ± 5.7%), although mean power in the second effort relative to the first was likely higher for the CWI group relative to control (3.0% ± 3.8%). The change in 1-s maximum mean sprint power in the CWI group was likely beneficial compared with control (4.4% ± 4.2%). Differences between groups for the 10-min time trial were unclear (-0.4% ± 4.3%).
Although some effects of CWI on performance were unclear, data from this study do not support recent speculation that CWI is detrimental to performance after increased training load in competitive cyclists.
冷水浸泡(CWI)可能有益于运动后的急性恢复,但它可能通过减弱适应训练的刺激来损害长期表现。我们比较了 CWI 和被动休息对模拟自行车大环赛期间自行车表现的影响。
34 名男性耐力训练的竞技自行车手被随机分为 CWI 组,每周 4 次,每次 15 分钟,水温为 15°C,或对照组(被动恢复),进行 7 天基线训练、21 天强化训练和 11 天减量期。10 名 CWI 组(最大有氧能力 5.13 ± 0.21 W·kg;均值 ± SD)和 11 名对照组(5.01 ± 0.41 W·kg)的自行车手满足完成训练和测试的标准。每周,自行车手完成一次高强度间歇骑行测试和两次 4 分钟的骑行,间隔 30 分钟。每周 CWI 进行 4 次,每次 15 分钟,水温为 15°C。
与基线和减量期相比,CWI 组自行车手的整体 4 分钟功率变化不明显,与对照组相比(2.7% ± 5.7%),尽管相对于第一努力,第二努力的平均功率可能更高(CWI 组 3.0% ± 3.8%)。CWI 组 1 秒最大平均冲刺功率的变化可能比对照组更有益(4.4% ± 4.2%)。CWI 组与对照组之间 10 分钟计时赛的差异不明显(-0.4% ± 4.3%)。
尽管 CWI 对表现的一些影响不明显,但本研究的数据不支持最近的推测,即 CWI 对增加训练负荷后竞技自行车手的表现不利。