Cold and hot water immersion are not more effective than placebo for the recovery of physical performance
The takeaway
Do cold-water or hot-water immersion help soccer players recover and adapt better than a placebo treatment?
In national-level soccer players, neither cold-water nor hot-water immersion was more effective than a placebo sham for recovering physical performance or improving training adaptations. Any perceived benefit of water immersion may be largely placebo or contextual.
ChallengesRead paper
Primary studyModerate evidence
Key points
- Randomized controlled trial comparing cold-water immersion, hot-water immersion, and a placebo sham in national-level soccer players.
- Outcomes covered physical performance recovery, perceptual recovery, and training adaptations across a season block.
- No meaningful superiority of cold or hot immersion over placebo was found for performance recovery or adaptations.
- Authors suggest water immersion benefits may be largely placebo or contextual.
- Teams should weigh the evidence and the logistics when setting recovery policy.
How it was conducted
- Design
- Randomized controlled trial conducted over a season block
- Participants
- National-level soccer players
- Groups
- Cold-water immersion, hot-water immersion, and placebo sham
- Outcomes
- Physical performance recovery, perceptual recovery, and training load and adaptation measures
What they found
- No meaningful superiority of cold-water immersion over placebo for performance recovery or training adaptations.
- No meaningful superiority of hot-water immersion over placebo for performance recovery or training adaptations.
- Findings point to water immersion benefits being largely placebo or contextual.
Limitations
- The available text reports only directional conclusions and does not provide the exact effect sizes, confidence intervals, or sample size needed to gauge precision.
- Conducted in national-level soccer players, so results may not transfer to other sports, recreational athletes, or different recovery contexts.
- A null finding can reflect limited statistical power rather than true absence of an effect.
Why it matters
- For patients
- Athletes who use ice baths or hot baths mainly to bounce back faster may be feeling a placebo effect rather than a real physical recovery boost.
- For clinicians
- Practitioners can question routine prescription of water immersion for recovery and weigh its real benefit against time, cost, and logistics.
- For readers
- This trial adds to growing doubt that cold-water or hot-water immersion outperforms a convincing sham for athletic recovery.
Source
doi:10.1007/s00421-025-05835-w
Read the original paperMore Pain Science studies
- Nociplastic pain: facts, controversies and future tasksPrimary study
- Comparative efficacy of platelet-rich plasma, corticosteroid, hyaluronic acid, and placeboPrimary study
- Pain science education concepts for pelvic pain: an e-Delphi of expert cliniciansConsensus
- Kinesiophobia, catastrophizing, and the duration of immobilization: a prospective studyCohort study
- Why might fears and worries persist after a pain education-grounded multimodal interventionPrimary study
- "I wish I knew then what I know now": pain science education concepts important for female athletesPrimary study