Efficacy of wearing compression garments during post-exercise period after two repeated bouts of strenuous exercise: a randomized crossover design in healthy, active males

BACKGROUND: The efficacy of wearing [a] compression garment (CG) between repeated bouts of exercise within a same day has not been fully understood. The present study determined the effect of wearing a CG after strenuous exercise sessions (consisting of sprint exercise, resistance exercise, drop jump) twice a day on exercise performance, muscle damage, and inflammatory responses. METHODS: Eleven physically active males (age, 22.7 ± 0.9 years; height, 175.7 ± 6.7 cm; body mass, 73.6 ± 10.2 kg; BMI, 23.8 ± 2.7 kg/m(2)) performed two trials (a randomized crossover design), consisting of the trial with either wearing a whole-body CG during post-exercise period (CG trial) or the trial with wearing a normal garment without specific pressure (CON trial). Two exercise sessions were conducted in the morning (09:00–10:00, Ex1) and afternoon (14:00–15:00, Ex2). Immediately after completing 60 min of each exercise, the subjects in the CG trial changed into a whole-body CG. Time-course changes in exercise performance (bench press power, jump performances, repeated sprint ability), blood variables (lactate, glucose, myoglobin, creatine kinase, interleukin-6, leptin), and scores of subjective feeling (fatigue, muscle soreness) were compared between the CG and CON trials before Ex1 (8:40), immediately before Ex2 (14:00, 4 h after Ex1), 4 h after Ex2 (19:00), and 24 h after the onset of Ex1 (9:00). RESULTS: Two bouts of exercise significantly decreased performances of counter movement jump (main effect for time: P = 0.04, F = 3.75, partial η (2) = 0.27) and rebound jump (main effect for time: P = 0.00, F = 12.22, partial η (2) = 0.55), while no significant difference was observed between the two trials (interaction: P = 0.10, F = 1.96, partial η (2) = 0.16 for counter movement jump, P = 0.93, F = 0.01, partial η (2) = 0.001 for rebound jump). Repeated sprint ability (power output during 10 × 6 s maximal sprint, 30-s rest periods between sprints) did not differ significantly between the two trials at any time points. Power output during bench press exercise was not significantly different between the two trials (interaction: P = 0.46, F = 0.99, partial η (2) = 0.09 for Ex1, P = 0.74, F = 0.38, partial η (2) = 0.04 for Ex2, P = 0.22, F = 1.54, partial η (2) = 0.13 for 24 h after the onset of Ex1). Serum myoglobin, creatine kinase, leptin, and plasma interleukin-6 were not significantly different between the two trials (interaction: P = 0.16, F = 2.23, partial η (2) = 0.18 for myoglobin; P = 0.39, F = 0.81, partial η (2) = 0.08 for creatine kinase; P = 0.28, F = 1.30, partial η (2) = 0.13 for leptin; P = 0.34, F = 1.05, partial η (2) = 0.12 for interleukin-6). Muscle soreness at 24 h during post-exercise period was significantly lower in the CG trial than in the CON trial for pectoralis major muscle (P = 0.04), while the value was inversely lower in the CON trial for hamstring (P = 0.047). CONCLUSIONS: Wearing a whole-body CG during the post-exercise period after two bouts of strenuous exercise sessions separated with 4 h of rest did not promote recovery of muscle function for lower limb muscles nor did it attenuate exercise-induced muscle damage in physically active males.