↓ Skip to main content

Evaluation of Hydrotherapy, Using Passive Tests and Power Tests, for Recovery Across a Cyclic Week of Competitive Rugby Union

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research, April 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (82nd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
11 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
reddit
1 Redditor
q&a
1 Q&A thread

Readers on

mendeley
249 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Evaluation of Hydrotherapy, Using Passive Tests and Power Tests, for Recovery Across a Cyclic Week of Competitive Rugby Union
Published in
Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research, April 2013
DOI 10.1519/jsc.0b013e318260ed9b
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

In team sports, a cycle of training, competition, and recovery occurs weekly during the competitive season. In this research, we evaluated hydrotherapy for recovery from a simulated game of rugby union tracked over a week of training. Twenty-four experienced male rugby union players (mean ± SD age 19.46 ± 0.82 years, weight 82.38 ± 11.12 kg, height 178.54 ± 5.75 cm) were randomly divided into 3 groups: cold water immersion (n = 8), contrast bath therapy (n = 8), and a control group (n = 8). The 2 forms of hydrotherapy were administered immediately after a simulated rugby game. Testing was conducted 1 hour before the game and at 5 intervals postgame: 1, 48, 72, 96, and 144 hours. Dependent variables included countermovement jump, 10- and 40-m sprints, sessional rating of perceived exertion (RPE), flexibility, thigh circumference, and self-reported delayed onset muscle soreness (DOMS). Significant differences in DOMS were found between the cold water immersion and contrast bath groups at 48 hours post intervention (p = 0.02), and between the control and contrast bath groups at 72 (p = 0.03) and 96 (p = 0.04) hours post intervention. Cold water immersion and contrast bath groups reported significantly different RPE at 72 hours (p = ?) and 96 hours post (p = 0.05) intervention. Athletes' perceptions of muscle soreness and sessional RPE scores for training were greater in the contrast bath group (20%) after the simulated game and throughout the training week. Although results from passive and power tests were inconclusive in determining whether cold water immersion or passive recovery was more effective in attenuating fatigue, results indicated contrast baths had little benefit in enhancing recovery during a cyclic week of rugby union.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 249 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Qatar 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 246 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 46 18%
Student > Master 39 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 8%
Researcher 19 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 4%
Other 35 14%
Unknown 81 33%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 78 31%
Medicine and Dentistry 40 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 21 8%
Psychology 6 2%
Unspecified 2 <1%
Other 9 4%
Unknown 93 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 February 2021.
All research outputs
#5,754,564
of 34,151,039 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research
#2,930
of 7,345 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#37,952
of 248,034 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research
#55
of 113 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,151,039 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,345 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 248,034 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 113 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.