Scholarlink

<p>This study aimed to analyze the acute effects of different ischemic preconditioning (IPC) protocols on 100-m freestyle swimming performance. This crossover clinical trial included 12 male competitive swimmers (16.2 ± 1.5&#xa0;years) who were randomly assigned to four experimental conditions: (1) IPC applied to the upper limbs (IPC-UL), (2) IPC applied to the lower limbs (IPC-LL), (3) IPC applied to both upper and lower limbs (IPC-UL/LL), and (4) a control condition (IPC-CONT). No statistically significant differences were observed in swimming performance between the IPC protocols and the control condition (<i>P</i> = 0.063). Descriptive individual analysis indicated that a proportion of athletes exhibited small reductions in race time following IPC-UL (66%) and IPC-LL (83%) compared with the control condition. However, these individual changes should be interpreted cautiously, as they are exploratory in nature and may fall within the expected variability associated with manual timing and day-to-day performance fluctuations.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Effects of different ischemic preconditioning protocols on sprint swimming speed: a crossover study

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年6月3日

查看全文
  • Wanessa Vieira de Vasconcelos Bittencourt,
  • Gabriel Rodrigues Neto,
  • Hidayane Gonçalves da Silva,
  • Julio César Gomes da Silva,
  • Heleodório Honorato dos Santos

摘要

This study aimed to analyze the acute effects of different ischemic preconditioning (IPC) protocols on 100-m freestyle swimming performance. This crossover clinical trial included 12 male competitive swimmers (16.2 ± 1.5 years) who were randomly assigned to four experimental conditions: (1) IPC applied to the upper limbs (IPC-UL), (2) IPC applied to the lower limbs (IPC-LL), (3) IPC applied to both upper and lower limbs (IPC-UL/LL), and (4) a control condition (IPC-CONT). No statistically significant differences were observed in swimming performance between the IPC protocols and the control condition (P = 0.063). Descriptive individual analysis indicated that a proportion of athletes exhibited small reductions in race time following IPC-UL (66%) and IPC-LL (83%) compared with the control condition. However, these individual changes should be interpreted cautiously, as they are exploratory in nature and may fall within the expected variability associated with manual timing and day-to-day performance fluctuations.