Journal of bodywork and movement therapies · 2025
Cupping therapy does not improve quadriceps muscle pain and fatigue intensity, perceived recovery, and vertical jump height after running: A randomized clinical trial.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Coutinho Larissa Oliveira Barbieri, Alves Bruno Soares, Caetano Raphael Oliveira, de Oliveira Lauria Fernanda, Laroqui de Carvalho Gustavo, da Silva Christiano Vieira, Fonseca Diogo Simões, Felício Diogo Carvalho
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The relationship between running training load and adaptation is complex. Cupping therapy has gained attention as a potential recovery strategy in recent years.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of cupping therapy in enhancing recovery among runners.
METHODS: A randomized clinical trial with a 72-h follow-up was conducted. The experimental group received 5 min of cupping therapy on the quadriceps, and the control group received sham hip and knee joint mobilization post-running. The outcomes evaluated were muscle pain and fatigue intensity (Numeric Visual Analog Scale), perceived recovery (Perceived Global Effect Scale), and unipodal vertical jump height (My Jump 2 app). Differences between groups were analyzed using generalized estimation equations.
RESULTS: Eighty-one recreational runners were included. No significant differences were observed between groups for muscle pain (-0.61, 95% CI: -1.35 to 0.14), fatigue intensity (-0.38, 95% CI: -1.21 to 0.45), perceived recovery (0.11, 95% CI: -0.54 to 0.75), or vertical jump height (0.75, 95% CI: -1.99 to 3.49).
CONCLUSION: Post-running cupping therapy does not improve recovery outcomes in recreational runners, raising doubts about its choice in clinical practice.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of cupping therapy in enhancing recovery among runners.
METHODS: A randomized clinical trial with a 72-h follow-up was conducted. The experimental group received 5 min of cupping therapy on the quadriceps, and the control group received sham hip and knee joint mobilization post-running. The outcomes evaluated were muscle pain and fatigue intensity (Numeric Visual Analog Scale), perceived recovery (Perceived Global Effect Scale), and unipodal vertical jump height (My Jump 2 app). Differences between groups were analyzed using generalized estimation equations.
RESULTS: Eighty-one recreational runners were included. No significant differences were observed between groups for muscle pain (-0.61, 95% CI: -1.35 to 0.14), fatigue intensity (-0.38, 95% CI: -1.21 to 0.45), perceived recovery (0.11, 95% CI: -0.54 to 0.75), or vertical jump height (0.75, 95% CI: -1.99 to 3.49).
CONCLUSION: Post-running cupping therapy does not improve recovery outcomes in recreational runners, raising doubts about its choice in clinical practice.