AI Summary & Key Takeaways
AI InsightAdditionally, the comparison between the groups Pre-T and Post-T showed no statistically significant difference (p>0,01).Conclusion: The active and passive recovery methots, did not have any effect on strength parameters in bodybuilders and does not provide any acute effect in the recovery period after high intensity training.
📌 3 Key Takeaways
Abstract
Aim: The purpose of this study was to determine the acute effect of short term active and passive recovery methods on strength after high intensity interval training (HIIT). Method: Twelve trained male bodybuilders (18–30 years of age) voluntary participated in the study, on a voluntary basis. The criteria for the athletes were being healthy, not having any chronic or acute disorders, and not having restrictions on movement due to injuries.Subjects applied randomly active and passive recovery techniques (Electrostimulation, core training, control) after each HIIT on three different days. Performance tests were conducted on athletes before (Pre-T) and after HIIT (Post-T). The data collected were analysed with dependent two sample t test and independent samples t test. Results: Although there was an increase in the anaerobic strength, vertical jump, and back strength levels, no statistically significant difference was found in between groups (p>0,01). Similarly, a decrease was found in the levels of leg strength and right-left handgrip strength in three groups. Although the difference in the control group was not meaningful in terms of these values, there was a significant difference in the right-left hand grip strength levels in the core training and stimulation groups (p<0,01). Pre-T the values of right-left handgrip strength in the core training group decreased from 48,46±5,06 to 46,16±5,84, from 47,95±5,44, to 46,50±5,43 respectively compared to Post-T (p<0,01). In the electrostimulation group, on the other hand, Pre-T the right handgrip strength decreased from 47,36±4,48 to 45,72±5,31 while Pre-T the left handgrip strength decreased from 46,45±4,27 to 44,13±5,05, compared to Post-T (p<0,01). Additionally, the comparison between the groups Pre-T and Post-T showed no statistically significant difference (p>0,01).Conclusion: The active and passive recovery methots, did not have any effect on strength parameters in bodybuilders and does not provide any acute effect in the recovery period after high intensity training.