Int J Sports Med
DOI: 10.1055/a-2615-3553
Review

Post-exercise physical recovery methods for combat sports: A scoping review

Robert Trybulski
1   Medical Department, Wojciech Korfanty Upper Silesian Academy, Katowice, Poland
2   Department of Physical Therapy and Ergotherapy, Department of Physical Therapy and Ergotherapy, Ivan Boberkyj Lviv State University of Physical Culture, 79007 Lviv, Ukraine, Lviv, Ukraine
,
Adrian Kużdzał
3   Institute of Physiotherapy, Faculty of Health Sciences and Psychology, Collegium Medicum, University of Rzeszów, Rzeszów, Poland
,
Adam Kawczyński
4   Department of Sport Science, University School of Physical Education in Wrocław, Wroclaw, Poland (Ringgold ID: RIN49938)
,
Sebastian Klich
5   Department of Paralympic Sport, Department of Paralympic Sport, Wrocław University of Health and Sport Sciences, 51-612 Wrocław, Poland, Wrocław, Poland
,
6   Department of Physical Education and Health, University of Szczecin, Szczecin, Poland
,
7   None, Instituto Politécnico de Viana do Castelo Escola Superior de Desporto e Lazer, Viana do Castelo, Portugal (Ringgold ID: RIN386417)
8   Department of Biomechanics and Sport Engineering, Department of Biomechanics and Sport Engineering, Gdansk University of Physical Education and Sport, 80-336 Gdansk, Poland, Gdansk, Poland
9   None, Sport Physical Activity and Health Research & Innovation Center, Viana do Castelo, Portugal, Viana do Castelo, Portugal
› Institutsangaben

This scoping review: (i) summarizes post-exercise recovery methods for combat sports athletes and (ii) synthesizes their effects on key biochemical, physiological, and physical outcomes. Trained CS athletes were included. Studies examined active (exercise) and passive (e.g., compression) recovery methods, comparing them to controls or alternatives. Outcomes—biochemical, physiological, or physical—were measured pre- and post-intervention in experimental and quasi-experimental designs. Study quality and risk of bias were assessed using a modified version of the Downs and Black assessment scale. Searches were performed in PubMed, Scopus, SPORTDiscus, and Web of Science. This review of 27 articles (554 athletes) found mixed effects of recovery methods on biochemistry. Active recovery aids acute lactate reduction, while compression and dry needling enhance pain threshold, perfusion, and muscle tone at 24–48h. Most methods have little impact on immediate performance, with few surpassing passive recovery at 24h. Different methods are studied in CS, though benefits for biochemical and physical outcomes appear limited. Active recovery aids lactate clearance, while compression and dry needling offer physiological benefits at 24–48h. Coaches may use these methods to improve metabolic and muscle recovery post-training; however, these approaches should be designed to meet the training demands, athlete preferences, and recovery timelines.



Publikationsverlauf

Eingereicht: 28. November 2024

Angenommen nach Revision: 16. Mai 2025

Accepted Manuscript online:
16. Mai 2025

© . Thieme. All rights reserved.

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Oswald-Hesse-Straße 50, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany