Skip to content

Hot- and Cold-Water Immersion Do Not Alter Performance or Perceived Fatigability but Improve Muscle Activation, Cardiac Vagal Modulation, and Cardiorespiratory Recovery After Distinct Running Protocols.

PMID 41452289 (2025): recovery — Recovery speed (study note for endurance athletes).

Last updated/Feb 23, 2026, 10:34 PM

Study note • PMID 41452289

Hot- and Cold-Water Immersion Do Not Alter Performance or Perceived Fatigability but Improve Muscle Activation, Cardiac Vagal Modulation, and Cardiorespiratory Recovery After Distinct Running Protocols.

Scandinavian journal of medicine & science in sports2025 • DOI 10.1111/sms.70191
Evidence C67/100
Action 2: Consider

Worth trying if it fits your goal and context.

ELI5

In plain language

This study investigated the effects of cold-water immersion (11 degrees C, CWI(11 degrees )) and hot-water immersion (41 degrees C, HWI(41 degrees )) on components of fatigability after distinct… (randomized trial; n=12 participants).

The abstract reports an association involving Recovery speed (not necessarily causation). Treat this as a signal, not a guarantee; confirm methods and context in the full paper.

Takeaways

What the abstract suggests

  • Study question: This study investigated the effects of cold-water immersion (11 degrees C, CWI(11 degrees )) and hot-water immersion (41 degrees C, HWI(41 degrees )) on components of fatigability after distinct…
  • The abstract reports an association involving Recovery speed (not necessarily causation).
  • Population: n=12 participants.
  • Protocol cues (title/abstract): 24 h • 2 h • 4 h.

Protocol

Protocol (as reported)

  • Intervention/exposure: recovery (vs placebo).
  • Dose/time/duration cues in abstract/title: 24 h • 2 h • 4 h.
  • Outcomes: Recovery speed.
  • Replication note: abstracts often omit adherence and timing; confirm details before changing training or supplementation.

Fit

Who it helps, and who should skip it

Who it helps

  • Athletes similar to the study population (n=12 participants) working on recovery.
  • Athletes who can measure Recovery speed with a repeatable workout or time-trial effort.

Who should skip

  • If you have symptoms or conditions that make the intervention risky, get professional guidance.
  • If you’re near race day and can’t safely test, defer the experiment.

Methods

What the study actually did

  • Design: randomized trial (placebo-controlled).
  • Population: n=12 participants.
  • Comparator: placebo.
  • Outcomes measured: Recovery speed.
  • Protocol cues mentioned: 24 h • 2 h • 4 h.
  • Source: PubMed PMID 41452289 (2025) — Scandinavian journal of medicine & science in sports.

Results excerpt

What the abstract reports

Furthermore, compared to placebo, HWI(41 degrees ) increased vastus lateralis activation during maximal voluntary contractions (RMS/M-wave(amp)) 2 and 4 h after the CONT(100%RCP), while CWI(11 degrees ) increased it at the same time points after the HIIT(150%RCP) (condition x time interactions, p < 0.05).

Note: excerpts are short; for full context, read the paper.

Limits

Limitations & bias

  • Abstract-only summaries can miss critical details (population, protocol, adherence, and context).
  • Single studies often don’t generalize to your event, history, and training load; treat results as a starting point.
  • If your context differs (elite vs recreational; cycling vs running), adjust expectations and be conservative.
  • This is performance information, not medical advice.

Coaching beta

Get a plan that adapts to your life.

Join the 26weeks.ai TestFlight beta for adaptive coaching, recovery-aware adjustments, and race-week reminders.

Keep going

Sources