This study aimed to systematically review fatigue responses following basketball match-play and during congested match schedules, considering performance, physiological, athlete-reported, and sleep-related outcomes. Relevant articles published until 23 January 2024 were searched using Scopus, Web of Science, and SPORTDiscus. After screening, 44 studies were included in the systematic review. The main findings indicate that, in most cases, vertical jumping and linear sprinting showed significant decrements at match-end (<1 hour post-match) compared to pre-match [small-to-very large effect sizes (ES)], with persistent (≥1 hour post-match) impairments lasting 24-48 hours in jumping (only in males, small-to-very large ES) and linear sprinting (moderate-to-very large ES). Physiological changes generally included significant increases (moderate-to-very large ES) in cortisol and nutrient metabolism markers at match-end, alongside persistent increases in muscle damage (mainly at 13-72 hours post-match) and inflammation (13-48 hours). Finally, match-play generally increased muscle soreness (mainly at 24-48 hours, moderate-to-very large ES) and perceived fatigue (mainly at match-end), with unclear effects on mood, and no apparent impact on sleep-related outcomes. Research assessing congested match schedules is limited, although possible worsening in muscle damage, inflammation, perceived fatigue and well-being were observed in male players. Overall, these findings indicate an impairment in some of the reviewed performance, physiological, and athlete-reported outcomes.

Purpose: To compare the effectiveness of active recovery (AR) versus static stretching (SS) during post-exercise recovery in basketball. Methods: Using a counterbalanced crossover design, 17 elite youth male players completed two 90-min training sessions, followed by either AR or SS. Differences in jump height (CMJ), heart rate variability (Ln-rMSSD), muscle soreness (VAS), perceived recovery (TQR) and hormonal biomarkers (cortisol, testosterone, testosterone:cortisol ratio) between interventions were assessed at pre-session, post-session (except hormonal biomarkers), post-recovery and 24 h post-session. Differences in Ln-rMSSD were additionally assessed upon awakening on training day, and the following morning. Results: No significant differences were found between interventions at corresponding time points (p > .05). However, the within-intervention time course of recovery differed, as CMJ values were lower at post-recovery, compared with all other time points, in SS only (p < .05, effect size [ES] moderate-to-very large). Additionally, Ln-rMSSD values failed to return to baseline at post-recovery in AR only (p < .05, ES large-to-very large). Similarly, TQR scores were impaired at post-session and post-recovery in AR only (p < .05, ES moderate-to-large). No differences were reported for the remaining variables (p > .05). Conclusion: Differences between AR and SS were probably due to short-term phenomena, indicating that neither strategy was likely superior for improving recovery in the longer term. Overall, neither strategy seemed to significantly improve post-exercise recovery.

Purpose: This study aimed to assess the effect of playing different pick-and-roll (PnR) defensive tactical options during small-sided games (SSGs) on external and internal loads in female basketball players. Methods: Twelve female basketball players (age 28 [2] y; stature 175 [6] cm; body mass 65 [7] kg; playing experience 18 [4] y) belonging to a team competing in the Lithuanian second division were recruited for this study. Across 3 experimental sessions and in a randomized order, players performed 3 SSGs sharing the same features but using 3 defensive strategies on the middle PnR action: Switch, Trap, and Drop. External load was measured using PlayerLoad (PL); the number of accelerations, decelerations, and changes of direction, classified based on their intensities as low (3.5 m·s⁻²); and jumps categorized as low (<40 cm) and high (≥40 cm). Internal load was measured via rating of perceived exertion (RPE). Results: Higher PL values in SSGs including Trap defense were found compared with Drop (P < .001, ES = 0.69, moderate) and Switch (P = .001, ES = 0.60, moderate). Additionally, a higher number of accelerations was registered in Trap defense compared with Drop defense (P = .027, ES = 0.99, moderate). Trap defense also led to higher RPE compared with Switch (P = .003, ES = 1.49, large) and Drop (P = .004, ES = 1.42, large) defense. Conclusions: Different defensive strategies on the middle PnR can influence the external and internal loads during SSGs, and female basketball coaches should consider the high demand of the Trap defense when designing SSGs.

Purpose: To assess the effect of whole-body cryotherapy (WBC) on postmatch recovery in basketball. Methods: Using a crossover design, 17 youth male players (age 16.2 [1.2] y, stature 190.5 [9.4] cm, body mass 79.2 [9.6] kg, experience 9.9 [3.9] y) completed 2 simulated matches, followed by WBC (4 min, −75 to − 85 °C) or a placebo intervention (CON). Countermovement-jump height, change-of-direction performance, 10- and 20-m sprint times, heart-rate variability (log-transformed squared root of the mean sum of the squared differences between R-R intervals [Ln-rMSSD]), muscle soreness, and perceived recovery (Perceived Recovery Status Scale [PRS]) were recorded at prematch, postmatch, postrecovery, and 24 hours postmatch. Additionally, Ln-rMSSD was recorded upon awakening on match day and the following morning. Results: Compared with CON, higher PRS values were reported in WBC at prematch and postrecovery (P ≤ .026), while no significant between-interventions differences were found for any other measure (P > .05). Regarding the effect of time, our findings revealed that 20-m sprint times, Ln-rMSSD, and PRS deteriorated in both interventions from prematch to postmatch (ie, acute changes, P ≤ .045), while muscle soreness worsened in WBC only (P ≤ .003). Conversely, countermovement-jump height, change-of-direction, and 10-m sprint performance were unaffected by match play in the acute phase (P > .05), while none of the investigated measures showed impairments at 24 hours postmatch, compared with prematch (P > .05). Conclusions: Overall, these findings suggest that WBC was mostly ineffective for improving postexercise recovery in the investigated sample, with benefits observed for perceived recovery being potentially influenced by the participants’ status at baseline (ie, higher prematch PRS scores in WBC compared with CON).

This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of foam rolling as a post-match recovery tool in basketball. Using a crossover design, 13 female players completed two simulated matches, followed by foam rolling (FR) or placebo (CON). Countermovement jump height (CMJ), heart rate variability (Ln-rMSSD), muscle soreness (VAS), perceived recovery (TQR) and fatigue (Rating-of-Fatigue) were recorded at pre-match, post-match, post-recovery and 24 h post-match. No significant effect of time*intervention and intervention were found for any variable (p > 0.05), while a significant effect of time (p < 0.01) was reported for all variables. Post-hoc analyses revealed lower CMJ and Ln-rMSSD at post-match compared with all other time points (p < 0.001), increases in pre-match VAS scores at all subsequent time points (p < 0.01), and worse TQR and Rating-of-Fatigue scores from pre-to-post-match and pre-match-to-post-recovery (p < 0.01), except for unchanged TQR values from pre-match-to-post-recovery in FR (p > 0.05). Overall, the present data suggest that foam rolling was generally ineffective for improving post-exercise recovery in female basketball players after a single match. Future research investigating the effectiveness of foam rolling in players of different sex, age and/or competitive level is warranted to provide further insight on the topic.

This study aimed to monitor internal load, well-being, and recovery status in U16 male water polo players during a congested competitive period. Fourteen athletes from an Italian club played 12 matches (seven friendly, five official) over 7 days. The internal match load was measured using the session-RPE method (s-RPE). Perceived enjoyment was measured with the Enjoyment Likert Scale (ENJ), while recovery and well-being were evaluated using the Perceived Recovery Scale (PRS) and the Hooper Index (HI), respectively. No significant main effects were found on s-RPE, PRS, and HI considering friendly and official matches. However, ENJ was significantly higher during official matches (p < 0.005). PRS values were significantly affected by daytime matches (p < 0.005), with better perceived recovery reported for morning matches. Linear mixed model analysis revealed significant associations between s-RPE and HI (p = 0.001), the fatigue item (p = 0.001), and the PRS (p = 0.004). These results suggest that as internal load increases, players experience higher fatigue and report lower recovery and well-being scores. Employing simple, non-invasive tools like the RPE, PRS, and HI can help coaches and support staff to identify early signs of overtraining or insufficient recovery, allowing for more individualized load management and injury prevention in youth water polo athletes.