Exploring the Efficacy of a Safe Cryotherapy Alternative: Physiological Temperature Changes From Cold-Water Immersion Versus Prolonged Cooling of Phase-Change Material

Purpose: To evaluate the effectiveness between cold-water immersion (CWI) and phase-change-material (PCM) cooling on intramuscular, core, and skin-temperature and cardiovascular responses. Methods: In a randomized, crossover design, 11 men completed 15 min of 15°C CWI to the umbilicus and 2-h recovery or 3 h of 15°C PCM covering the quadriceps and 1 h of recovery, separated by 24 h. Vastus lateralis intramuscular temperature at 1 and 3 cm, core and skin temperature, heart-rate variability, and thermal comfort were recorded at baseline and 15-min intervals throughout treatment and recovery. Results: Intramuscular temperature decreased (P < .001) during and after both treatments. A faster initial effect was observed from 15 min of CWI (Δ: 4.3°C [1.7°C] 1 cm; 5.5°C [2.1°C] 3 cm; P = .01). However, over time (2 h 15 min), greater effects were observed from prolonged PCM treatment (Δ: 4.2°C [1.9°C] 1 cm; 2.2°C [2.2°C] 3 cm; treatment × time, P = .0001). During the first hour of recovery from both treatments, intramuscular temperature was higher from CWI at 1 cm (P = .013) but not 3 cm. Core temperature deceased 0.25° (0.32°) from CWI (P = .001) and 0.28°C (0.27°C) from PCM (P = .0001), whereas heart-rate variability increased during both treatments (P = .001), with no differences between treatments. Conclusions: The magnitude of temperature reduction from CWI was comparable with PCM, but intramuscular temperature was decreased for longer during PCM. PCM cooling packs offer an alternative for delivering prolonged cooling whenever application of CWI is impractical while also exerting a central effect on core temperature and heart rate.

Kinesio® Tape Barrier Does Not Inhibit Intramuscular Cooling During Cryotherapy

Context: Allied health care professionals commonly apply cryotherapy as treatment for acute musculoskeletal trauma and the associated symptoms. Understanding the impact of a tape barrier on intramuscular temperature can assist in determining treatment duration for effective cryotherapy. Objective: To determine whether Kinesio® Tape acts as a barrier that affects intramuscular temperature during cryotherapy application. Design: A repeated-measures, counterbalanced design in which the independent variable was tape application and the dependent variable was muscle temperature as measured by thermocouples placed 1 cm beneath the adipose layer. Additional covariates for robustness were body mass index and adipose thickness. Setting: University research laboratory. Participants: Nineteen male college students with no contraindications to cryotherapy, no known sensitivity to Kinesio® Tape, and no reported quadriceps injury within the past 6 months. Intervention: Topical cryotherapy: cubed ice bags of 1 kg and 0.5 kg. Main Outcome Measures: Intramuscular temperature. Results: The tape barrier had no statistically significant effect on muscle temperature. The pattern of temperature change was indistinguishable between participants with and without tape application. Conclusions: Findings suggest that health care professionals can combine cryotherapy with a Kinesio® Tape application without any need for adjustments to cryotherapy duration.

Examination of Intramuscular and Skin Temperature Decreases Produced by the PowerPlay Intermittent Compression Cryotherapy

Context: Previous research has found ice bags are more effective at lowering intramuscular temperature than gel packs. Recent studies have evaluated intramuscular temperature cooling decreases with ice bag versus Game Ready and with the PowerPlay system wetted ice bag inserts; however, intramuscular temperature decreases elicited by PowerPlay with the standard frozen gel pack inserts have not been examined. Objective: Evaluate the rate and magnitude of cooling using PowerPlay with frozen gel pack (PP-gel) option, PowerPlay with wetted ice bag (PP-ice) option, and control (no treatment) on skin and intramuscular temperature (2 cm subadipose). Design: Repeated-measures counterbalanced study. Setting: University research laboratory. Patients or Other Participants: Twelve healthy college-aged participants (4 men and 8 women; age = 23.08 (1.93) y, height = 171.66 (9.47) cm, mass = 73.67 (13.46) kg, and subcutaneous thickness = 0.90 (0.35) cm). Intervention(s): PowerPlay (70 mm Hg) with either wetted ice bag or frozen gel pack was applied to posterior aspect of nondominant calf for 30 minutes; control lay prone for 30 minutes. Participants underwent each treatment in counterbalanced order (minimum 4 d, maximum 10 d between). Main Outcome Measure(s): Muscle temperature was measured via 21-gauge catheter thermocouple (IT-21; Physitemp Instruments, Inc). Skin temperature was measured via surface thermocouple (SST-1; Physitemp Instruments, Inc). Results: Significant treatment-by-time interaction for muscle cooling (F10,80 = 11.262, P = .01, , observed β = 0.905) was observed. PP-ice cooled faster than both PP-gel and control from minutes 12 to 30 (all Ps < .05); PP-gel cooled faster than control from minutes 18 to 30 (all Ps < .05). Mean decreases from baseline: PP-ice = 4.8°C (2.8°C), PP-gel = 2.3°C (0.8°C), and control = 1.1°C (0.4°C). Significant treatment-by-time interaction for skin cooling (F10,80 = 23.920, P = .001, , observed β = 0.998) was observed. PP-ice cooled faster than both PP-gel and control from minutes 6 to 30 (all Ps < .05); PP-gel cooled faster than control from minutes 12 to 30 (all Ps < .05). Mean decreases from baseline: PP-ice = 14.6°C (4.8°C), PP-gel = 4.0°C (0.9°C), and control = 1.0°C (1.0°C). Conclusions: PP-ice produces clinically and statistically greater muscle and skin cooling compared with PP-gel and control.