Use Of Compression Stockings In Runners During Consecutive Training: A Randomized Crossover Design Study

PURPOSE: This study examines the effects of CGs on sleep, recovery-related factors, delayed onset muscle soreness (DOMS), and rating of perceived exertion (RPE), as well as their influence on belief in CGs before and after exercise, while also evaluating their effectiveness during the training recovery period. METHODS:Twelve endurance runners participated in a randomized crossover design. They completed a high-intensity running session followed by a 24-hour recovery, with and without thigh-high compression stockings (23-32 mmHg). Sleep quality, mental and physical recovery were assessed using a 1-10 scale. DOMS and belief were measured via a 10 cm Visual Analog Scale (VAS), with scores determined by the distance (mm) from the starting point to the participant’s mark. RESULTS: Due to violations of normality, a non-parametric Friedman test was used to analyze sleep quality, sleep hours, recovery mentally, recovery physically, and DOMS. No significant differences were found in sleep hours and recovery mentally. Sleep quality differed significantly across conditions (p = 0.034), with CGs Day 2 showing the highest mean score (8.2 ± 1.2) and CGs Day 1 the lowest (6.6 ± 1.7). Recovery physically also showed significant differences (p = 0.015), with control group (CON) Day 1 having the highest mean score (7.6 ± 0.9) and CON Day 2 the lowest (6.4 ± 0.9), suggesting the intervention may have influenced sleep-related recovery in CGs. DOMS showed a significant main effect of condition (Χ2 = 21.10, p = 0.0001, ES = 0.64), with CGs exhibiting lower DOMS during recovery compared to CON. Additionally, a significant time × condition interaction (Χ2 = 48.19, p < 0.001, ES = 1.46) indicated CGs recovered faster than CON across time points. Furthermore, RPE significantly increased from Day 1 to Day 2 in the control condition (t = -2.283, p = 0.043, d = -0.659), indicating a moderate effect size. In contrast, RPE decreased in the CGs condition (t = 1.650, p = 0.127, d = 0.393), though this change was not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: These results highlight the potential benefits of CGs in enhancing perceived recovery and reducing exertion. Improved sleep quality, faster recovery, and lower DOMS suggest a positive impact on overall recovery, potentially supporting better performance sustainability in subsequent training sessions.