Cargando…
Team sport athletes’ perceptions and use of recovery strategies: a mixed-methods survey study
BACKGROUND: A variety of recovery strategies are used by athletes, although there is currently no research that investigates perceptions and usage of recovery by different competition levels of team sport athletes. METHODS: The recovery techniques used by team sport athletes of different competition...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5326499/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28250934 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13102-017-0071-3 |
_version_ | 1782510569096478720 |
---|---|
author | Crowther, Fiona Sealey, Rebecca Crowe, Melissa Edwards, Andrew Halson, Shona |
author_facet | Crowther, Fiona Sealey, Rebecca Crowe, Melissa Edwards, Andrew Halson, Shona |
author_sort | Crowther, Fiona |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: A variety of recovery strategies are used by athletes, although there is currently no research that investigates perceptions and usage of recovery by different competition levels of team sport athletes. METHODS: The recovery techniques used by team sport athletes of different competition levels was investigated by survey. Specifically this study investigated if, when, why and how the following recovery strategies were used: active land-based recovery (ALB), active water-based recovery (AWB), stretching (STR), cold water immersion (CWI) and contrast water therapy (CWT). RESULTS: Three hundred and thirty-one athletes were surveyed. Fifty-seven percent were found to utilise one or more recovery strategies. Stretching was rated the most effective recovery strategy (4.4/5) with ALB considered the least effective by its users (3.6/5). The water immersion strategies were considered effective/ineffective mainly due to psychological reasons; in contrast STR and ALB were considered to be effective/ineffective mainly due to physical reasons. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that athletes may not be aware of the specific effects that a recovery strategy has upon their physical recovery and thus athlete and coach recovery education is encouraged. This study also provides new information on the prevalence of different recovery strategies and contextual information that may be useful to inform best practice among coaches and athletes. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5326499 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-53264992017-03-01 Team sport athletes’ perceptions and use of recovery strategies: a mixed-methods survey study Crowther, Fiona Sealey, Rebecca Crowe, Melissa Edwards, Andrew Halson, Shona BMC Sports Sci Med Rehabil Research Article BACKGROUND: A variety of recovery strategies are used by athletes, although there is currently no research that investigates perceptions and usage of recovery by different competition levels of team sport athletes. METHODS: The recovery techniques used by team sport athletes of different competition levels was investigated by survey. Specifically this study investigated if, when, why and how the following recovery strategies were used: active land-based recovery (ALB), active water-based recovery (AWB), stretching (STR), cold water immersion (CWI) and contrast water therapy (CWT). RESULTS: Three hundred and thirty-one athletes were surveyed. Fifty-seven percent were found to utilise one or more recovery strategies. Stretching was rated the most effective recovery strategy (4.4/5) with ALB considered the least effective by its users (3.6/5). The water immersion strategies were considered effective/ineffective mainly due to psychological reasons; in contrast STR and ALB were considered to be effective/ineffective mainly due to physical reasons. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that athletes may not be aware of the specific effects that a recovery strategy has upon their physical recovery and thus athlete and coach recovery education is encouraged. This study also provides new information on the prevalence of different recovery strategies and contextual information that may be useful to inform best practice among coaches and athletes. BioMed Central 2017-02-24 /pmc/articles/PMC5326499/ /pubmed/28250934 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13102-017-0071-3 Text en © The Author(s). 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Crowther, Fiona Sealey, Rebecca Crowe, Melissa Edwards, Andrew Halson, Shona Team sport athletes’ perceptions and use of recovery strategies: a mixed-methods survey study |
title | Team sport athletes’ perceptions and use of recovery strategies: a mixed-methods survey study |
title_full | Team sport athletes’ perceptions and use of recovery strategies: a mixed-methods survey study |
title_fullStr | Team sport athletes’ perceptions and use of recovery strategies: a mixed-methods survey study |
title_full_unstemmed | Team sport athletes’ perceptions and use of recovery strategies: a mixed-methods survey study |
title_short | Team sport athletes’ perceptions and use of recovery strategies: a mixed-methods survey study |
title_sort | team sport athletes’ perceptions and use of recovery strategies: a mixed-methods survey study |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5326499/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28250934 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13102-017-0071-3 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT crowtherfiona teamsportathletesperceptionsanduseofrecoverystrategiesamixedmethodssurveystudy AT sealeyrebecca teamsportathletesperceptionsanduseofrecoverystrategiesamixedmethodssurveystudy AT crowemelissa teamsportathletesperceptionsanduseofrecoverystrategiesamixedmethodssurveystudy AT edwardsandrew teamsportathletesperceptionsanduseofrecoverystrategiesamixedmethodssurveystudy AT halsonshona teamsportathletesperceptionsanduseofrecoverystrategiesamixedmethodssurveystudy |