The effects of compression garments on performance of prolonged manual-labour exercise and recovery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigated the effects of wearing compression garments during and 24 h following a 4-h exercise protocol simulating manual-labour tasks. Ten physically trained male participants, familiar with labouring activities, undertook 4 h of work tasks characteristic of industrial workplaces. Participants completed 2 testing sessions, separated by at least 1 week. In the experimental condition, participants wore a full-length compression top and compression shorts during the exercise protocol and overnight recovery, with normal work clothes worn in the control condition. Testing for serum creatine kinase and C-reactive protein, handgrip strength, knee flexion and extension torque, muscle stiffness, perceived muscle soreness and fatigue as well as heart rate and rating of perceived exertion (RPE) responses to 4-min cycling were performed before, following, and 24 h after exercise. Creatine kinase, muscle soreness, and rating of perceived fatigue increased following the exercise protocol (p < 0.05) as did RPE to a standardised cycling warm-up bout. Conversely, no postexercise changes were observed in C-reactive protein, handgrip strength, peak knee flexion torque, or stiffness measures (p > 0.05). Knee extension torque was significantly higher in the control condition at 24 h postexercise (3.1% ± 5.4% change; compression: 2.2% ± 11.1% change), although no other variables were different between conditions at any time. However, compression demonstrated a moderate-large effect (d > 0.60) to reduce perceived muscle soreness, fatigue, and RPE from standardised warm-up at 24 h postexercise. The current findings suggest that compression may assist in perceptual recovery from manual-labour exercise with implications for the ability to perform subsequent work bouts.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".