Comparative Effectiveness of Active Recovery and Static Stretching During Post-Exercise Recovery in Elite Youth Basketball.

Purpose: To compare the effectiveness of active recovery (AR) versus static stretching (SS) during post-exercise recovery in basketball. Methods: Using a counterbalanced crossover design, 17 elite youth male players completed two 90-min training sessions, followed by either AR or SS. Differences in jump height (CMJ), heart rate variability (Ln-rMSSD), muscle soreness (VAS), perceived recovery (TQR) and hormonal biomarkers (cortisol, testosterone, testosterone:cortisol ratio) between interventions were assessed at pre-session, post-session (except hormonal biomarkers), post-recovery and 24 h post-session. Differences in Ln-rMSSD were additionally assessed upon awakening on training day, and the following morning. Results: No significant differences were found between interventions at corresponding time points (p > .05). However, the within-intervention time course of recovery differed, as CMJ values were lower at post-recovery, compared with all other time points, in SS only (p < .05, effect size [ES] moderate-to-very large). Additionally, Ln-rMSSD values failed to return to baseline at post-recovery in AR only (p < .05, ES large-to-very large). Similarly, TQR scores were impaired at post-session and post-recovery in AR only (p < .05, ES moderate-to-large). No differences were reported for the remaining variables (p > .05). Conclusion: Differences between AR and SS were probably due to short-term phenomena, indicating that neither strategy was likely superior for improving recovery in the longer term. Overall, neither strategy seemed to significantly improve post-exercise recovery.

Is foam rolling as effective as its popularity suggests? A randomised crossover study exploring post-match recovery in female basketball.

This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of foam rolling as a post-match recovery tool in basketball. Using a crossover design, 13 female players completed two simulated matches, followed by foam rolling (FR) or placebo (CON). Countermovement jump height (CMJ), heart rate variability (Ln-rMSSD), muscle soreness (VAS), perceived recovery (TQR) and fatigue (Rating-of-Fatigue) were recorded at pre-match, post-match, post-recovery and 24 h post-match. No significant effect of time*intervention and intervention were found for any variable (p > 0.05), while a significant effect of time (p < 0.01) was reported for all variables. Post-hoc analyses revealed lower CMJ and Ln-rMSSD at post-match compared with all other time points (p < 0.001), increases in pre-match VAS scores at all subsequent time points (p < 0.01), and worse TQR and Rating-of-Fatigue scores from pre-to-post-match and pre-match-to-post-recovery (p < 0.01), except for unchanged TQR values from pre-match-to-post-recovery in FR (p > 0.05). Overall, the present data suggest that foam rolling was generally ineffective for improving post-exercise recovery in female basketball players after a single match. Future research investigating the effectiveness of foam rolling in players of different sex, age and/or competitive level is warranted to provide further insight on the topic.

The Application of Recovery Strategies in Basketball: A Worldwide Survey.

The purpose of this study was to assess the perceived usefulness, actual use and barriers to the implementation of recovery strategies among basketball practitioners. 107 participants (strength and conditioning coaches, sport scientists, performance specialists) from different countries and competitive levels completed an online survey. Most participants rated recovery strategies as either extremely (46%) or very important (49%). Active recovery, massage, foam rolling, and stretching were perceived as most useful (80, 73, 72 and 59% of participants, respectively) and were most frequently adopted (68, 61, 72 and 67%, respectively). Participants mentioned lack of devices and facilities (51%), excessive cost (51%), lack of time (27%), players' negative perception (25%) and lack of sufficient evidence (16%) as barriers to the implementation of recovery strategies. The present findings reveal that some dissociation between scientific evidence and perceived effectiveness was present among the study participants. A possible solution would be to ensure that scientific evidence-based guidelines are followed when considering the application of recovery strategies. Regarding actual use, participants favored easily implementable strategies (e.g. active recovery, stretching), rather than evidence-supported, but expensive and/or impractical strategies (e.g. whole-body cryotherapy). Possible solutions may include the use of practical tools that don't need specific facilities, the development and validation of new low-cost recovery devices, the promotion of players education regarding recovery strategies, and conducting further research to increase the scientific knowledge in the area.

Assessing the External Load Associated With High-Intensity Activities Recorded During Official Basketball Games.

Load monitoring in basketball is fundamental to develop training programs, maximizing performance while reducing injury risk. However, information regarding the load associated with specific activity patterns during competition is limited. This study aimed at assessing the external load associated with high-intensity activities recorded during official basketball games, with respect to different (1) activity patterns, (2) playing positions, and (3) activities performed with or without ball. Eleven male basketball players (six backcourt, five frontcourt, age: 20.5 ± 1.1 years, stature: 191.5 ± 8.7 cm, body mass: 86.5 ± 11.3 kg; experience: 8.5 ± 2.4 years) competing in the Lithuanian third division were recruited for this study. Three in-season games were assessed via time-motion analysis and microsensors. Specifically, the high-intensity activities including sprints, high-intensity specific movements (HSM) and jumps were identified and subsequently the external load [PlayerLoad™ (PL) and PlayerLoad™/min (PL/min)] of each activity was determined. Linear mixed models were used to examine differences in PL, PL/min and mean duration between activity pattern, playing positions and activities performed with or without ball. Results revealed PL was lower in jumps compared to sprints [p < 0.001, effect size (ES) = 0.68] and HSMs (p < 0.001, ES = 0.58), while PL/min was greater in sprints compared to jumps (p = 0.023, ES = 0.22). Jumps displayed shorter duration compared to sprints (p < 0.001, ES = 1.10) and HSMs (p < 0.001, ES = 0.81), with HSMs lasting longer than sprints (p = 0.002, ES = 0.17). Jumps duration was longer in backcourt than frontcourt players (p < 0.001, ES = 0.33). When considering activity patterns combined, PL (p < 0.001, ES = 0.28) and duration (p < 0.001, ES = 0.43) were greater without ball. Regarding HSMs, PL/min was higher with ball (p = 0.036, ES = 0.14), while duration was longer without ball (p < 0.001, ES = 0.34). The current findings suggest that external load differences in high-intensity activities exist among activity patterns and between activities performed with and without ball, while no differences were found between playing positions. Practitioners should consider these differences when designing training sessions.