The effect of leg compression garments on the mechanical characteristics and performance of single-leg hopping in healthy male volunteers

Putting the Squeeze on Compression Garments: Current Evidence and Recommendations for Future Research: A Systematic Scoping Review

Background

Compression garments are regularly worn during exercise to improve physical performance, mitigate fatigue responses, and enhance recovery. However, evidence for their efficacy is varied and the methodological approaches and outcome measures used within the scientific literature are diverse.

Objectives

The aim of this scoping review is to provide a comprehensive overview of the effects of compression garments on commonly assessed outcome measures in response to exercise, including: performance, biomechanical, neuromuscular, cardiovascular, cardiorespiratory, muscle damage, thermoregulatory, and perceptual responses.

Methods

A systematic search of electronic databases (PubMed, SPORTDiscus, Web of Science and CINAHL Complete) was performed from the earliest record to 27 December, 2020.

Results

In total, 183 studies were identified for qualitative analysis with the following breakdown: performance and muscle function outcomes: 115 studies (63%), biomechanical and neuromuscular: 59 (32%), blood and saliva markers: 85 (46%), cardiovascular: 76 (42%), cardiorespiratory: 39 (21%), thermoregulatory: 19 (10%) and perceptual: 98 (54%). Approximately 85% (n = 156) of studies were published between 2010 and 2020.

Conclusions

Evidence is equivocal as to whether garments improve physical performance, with little evidence supporting improvements in kinetic or kinematic outcomes. Compression likely reduces muscle oscillatory properties and has a positive effect on sensorimotor systems. Findings suggest potential increases in arterial blood flow; however, it is unlikely that compression garments meaningfully change metabolic responses, blood pressure, heart rate, and cardiorespiratory measures. Compression garments increase localised skin temperature and may reduce perceptions of muscle soreness and pain following exercise; however, rating of perceived exertion during exercise is likely unchanged. It is unlikely that compression garments negatively influence exercise-related outcomes. Future research should assess wearer belief in compression garments, report pressure ranges at multiple sites as well as garment material, and finally examine individual responses and varying compression coverage areas.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40279-021-01604-9.

Association of Lower Limb Compression Garments During High-Intensity Exercise with Performance and Physiological Responses: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Although compression garments are used to improve sports performance, methodological approaches and the direction of evidence regarding garments for use in high-intensity exercise settings are diverse.

OBJECTIVES

Our primary aim was to summarize the association between lower-limb compression garments (LLCGs) and changes in sports performance during high-intensity exercise. We also aimed to summarize evidence about the following physiological parameters related to sports performance: vertical jump height (VJ), maximal oxygen uptake (VO₂max), submaximal oxygen uptake (VO₂submax), blood lactate concentrations ([La]), and ratings of perceived exertion (RPE, 6-20 Borg scale).

METHODS

We searched electronic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov) and reference lists for previous reviews. Eligible studies included randomized controlled trials with athletes or physically active subjects (≥ 18 years) using any type of LLCG during high-intensity exercise. The results were described as weighted mean difference (WMD) with a 95% confidence interval (95% CI).

RESULTS

The 23 included studies showed low statistical heterogeneity for the pooled outcomes. We found that LLCGs yielded similar running performance to controls (50-400 m: WMD 0.06 s [95% CI - 1.99 to 2.11]; 800-3000 m: WMD 6.10 s [95% CI - 7.23 to 19.43]; > 5000 m: WMD 1.01 s [95% CI - 84.80 to 86.82]). Likewise, we found no evidence that LLCGs were superior in secondary outcomes (VJ: WMD 2.25 cm [95% CI - 2.51 to 7.02]; VO₂max: WMD 0.24 mL.kg^-1.min^-1 [95% CI - 1.48 to 1.95]; VO₂submax: WMD - 0.26 mL.kg^-1.min^-1 [95% CI - 2.66 to 2.14]; [La]: WMD 0.19 mmol/L [95% CI - 0.22 to 0.60]; RPE: WMD - 0.20 points [95% CI - 0.48 to 0.08]).

CONCLUSIONS

LLCGs were not associated with improved performance in VJ, VO₂max, VO₂submax, [La], or RPE during high-intensity exercise. Such evidence should be taken into account when considering using LLCGs to enhance running performance.

The Effects of a Compression Garment on Lower Body Kinematics and Kinetics During a Drop Vertical Jump in Female Collegiate Athletes

Background

The use of compression garments has spread rapidly among athletes, largely because of marketing and perceived benefits. Upon review, it is unclear whether compression garments have a significant effect on performance and recovery, although they have been found to enhance proprioception. Further, it is reported that compression of the knee joint improves both dynamic and static balance. However, there is currently a paucity of data demonstrating the effects of compression garments on the biomechanical risk factors of knee-related injuries in female athletes.

Purpose

To evaluate the ability of a directional compression garment to alter hip and knee kinematics and kinetics during a drop vertical jump (DVJ) in healthy college-aged female athletes.

Study Design

Controlled laboratory study.

Methods

A sample of 23 healthy female collegiate athletes (mean age, 19.6 ± 1.3 years) participating in jumping sports (volleyball, basketball, and soccer) was included in this analysis. Each athlete performed 2 sets of 3 DVJs with and without a directional compression garment. Three-dimensional hip and knee kinematics and kinetics were collected using a standard Helen-Hayes 29-marker set, which was removed and reapplied after the garment was fitted, as well as 8 visible-red cameras and 2 force platforms. Each participant was tested in a single session.

Results

Hip abduction range of motion was significantly reduced from 12.6° ± 5.5° to 10.2° ± 4.6° (P = .002) while performing DVJs without and with the compression garment, respectively. No statistically significant differences between conditions were found in peak hip abduction, knee valgus range of motion, peak valgus, peak hip abduction moment, and peak knee valgus moment.

Conclusion

The results of this study show that wearing compression garments does have minimal effects on lower body mechanics during landing from a DVJ, partially supporting the idea that compression garments could acutely alter movement patterns associated with the knee injury risk. However, further research should focus on muscle activation patterns and adaptations over time.

Clinical Relevance

The use of specifically designed compression garments could aid in the prevention of knee injuries by inducing changes in jumping mechanics.