Evaluating the effect of sports compression tights on balance, sprinting, jumping and change of direction tasks

ABSTRACT

Compression garments are commonly used during athletic tasks. However, the effect of compression garments on balance, sprinting, jumping and change of direction performance requires further investigation. In the current study, 24 recreationally active participants (12 males, 12 females, age 27 ± 3 years) completed single-leg balance tasks, countermovement jumps, drop jumps, 10 m straight line sprints and change of direction tasks wearing either compression tights (COMP) or regular exercise tights (CON). There was a significant main effect of the condition for 10 m sprint time (p = 0.03, d = -0.18) and change of direction time (p = 0.03, d = -0.20) in favour of COMP. In addition, there was a significant, small difference (p = 0.05, d = -0.30) in ellipse area and a small (p = 0.16, d = 0.21) difference in balance time in favour of COMP during a single-leg balance task. There were no significant differences between trials for any of the other balance or jump tests (p > 0.05). The application of compression tights during exercise may offer small benefits to the performance of balance and change of direction tasks, though these benefits are likely within the typical error of measurement for the tests used.

KEYWORDS:

• Compression garments
• team sport
• performance
• centre of pressure

Introduction

Compression garments (CGs) are a performance aid that have become widely adopted amongst athletic cohorts for their purported benefits of improving blood flow and blood lactate clearance during training, contributing to improved comfort and a reduction in perceived exertion (Leabeater et al., 2022). Up to 51% of elite Australian representative athletes, for example, report using compression garments during training 1–3 times per week (Driller & Brophy-Williams, 2016). These garments can be applied in a variety of styles including upper, lower and whole-body garments, however the most commonly used and researched compression garment is lower-body tights (Driller & Brophy-Williams, 2016; Leabeater et al., 2022). In clinical settings, CGs are used to promote blood flow from superficial veins into deep veins and prevent cutaneous venous statis (Mayberry et al., 1991), though these circulatory changes have generally not been demonstrated in settings when CGs are worn during exercise (Rennerfelt et al., 2019). Other potential mechanisms of CGs that may influence exercise performance include compressive support for large muscle bellies (Doan et al., 2003) and a reduction in soft tissue movement (Broatch et al., 2020), both of which have the potential to reduce energy expenditure by the athlete and lessen exercise-induced inflammation and muscle damage (Brophy-Williams et al., 2019; Engel et al., 2016). In turn, this may contribute to improvements in subsequent exercise bouts, as shown in running time trial performance (Brophy-Williams et al., 2019) and repeated vertical jump performance (Duffield et al., 2010).

The most commonly researched exercise modality with the use of CGs is running, accounting for 47% of all during-exercise studies in a recent systematic review of the topic (Leabeater et al., 2022). Conversely, research concerning the use of CGs during team sport or similar activities is less common. As a result, the potential effect of these garments on performance outcomes during sprinting, jumping and agility tasks has not been explored in detail. There is some indication that compression tights may improve distance covered at higher speed zones (>12 km·h⁻¹) in netball-specific circuits (Higgins et al., 2009), and are also associated with small improvements in 6 m sprint time in a basketball-specific circuit (Driller et al., 2021). This may be related to a reduction in perceived fatigue and reduced energy expenditure across physical tasks with the use of compression, allowing for greater outputs during higher-intensity activities (Driller et al., 2021; MacRae et al., 2011). When considering speed and power activities in isolation, countermovement jump height as well as average power across repeated countermovement jumps has generally been improved with the use of compression shorts or tights (Doan et al., 2003; Kraemer et al., 1996; Rugg & Sternlicht, 2013), though in these cases, garment pressure was not reported or only manufacturer values were provided. It has previously been suggested that eccentric force may be enhanced with CGs in a similar way to compressive powerlifting garments (e.g., squat suits) that are intended to provide additional elastic energy (Leabeater et al., 2022). Although, previous research has focused on the application of compression shorts or socks during sprinting, jumping and team sport activities (Bernhardt & Anderson, 2005; De Britto et al., 2017; Šambaher et al., 2016), rather than compression tights, which are a popular option among athletes of varying levels.

Another promising area of compression garment research is the potential effect of these garments on balance and postural control. These are important aspects of sports performance that contribute to the successful execution of basic and complex sports skills (Adlerton et al., 2003). Constant adjustments to postural control are made during both dynamic and static conditions to maintain equilibrium and prevent falling, and can be summarised through centre of pressure (CoP) measurements such as displacement and path length (Vette et al., 2010). Previously, it has been reported that CGs can improve stabilisation time and reduce movement variability during a single leg, visually occluded balance task (Michael et al., 2014) and improve stability during a single leg balance task without external visual feedback (Hung, 2022), though garment pressure for these studies is not known. This may be related to improved proprioception with the use of surface compression that in turn improves positional limb awareness and coordination (Michael et al., 2014). However, considering these balance tests in isolation does not inform overall sporting performance. Studies that have considered balance performance alongside speed, agility and jumping tasks have reported no significant changes in balance with compression shorts (Bernhardt & Anderson, 2005; Cavanaugh et al., 2016; Sperlich et al., 2013), although compression tights have not been investigated in a similar manner.

While CGs are a popular garment choice and possible performance aid, there is currently limited research to support their use during sprinting, jumping, and change of direction tasks that constitute many sports. Additionally, the effects of CGs on balance and postural control have not been explored in detail, despite existing literature describing the potential benefits of the garments in this area. Therefore, the aim of this study is to investigate the effect of lower-body CGs on physical performance during balance, jumping, sprinting and change of direction tasks and evaluate the effectiveness of CGs as a performance tool when worn during exercise that mimics team-sport activity. It was hypothesised that using lower body CGs will provide a performance benefit during balance, jumping, sprinting and change of direction tasks when compared to the use of exercise tights of a similar appearance.

Materials and methods

Participants

Twenty-four recreationally trained individuals (Table 1) participated in the current study and provided informed consent. An a priori sample size calculation indicated that a minimum of 16 participants would be required to detect an interaction effect size of 0.3 with 80% power at an alpha of 0.05. The effect size was determined from previously reported differences in jumping and sprinting activities with and without compression tights (De Britto et al., 2017; Driller et al., 2021). Female participants could elect to provide their menstruation status by completing an anonymous form at the time of height and weight recordings. All participants were participating in regular physical exercise sessions (∼3 times per week) and were free from lower-limb injuries (hip, knee or ankle) that may have affected their ability to perform the physical performance tests. Institutional ethics approval was provided prior to the commencement of data collection.

Table 1. Participant details.

	Males (n = 12)	Females (n = 12)
Age (years, mean ± SD)	26 ± 2	27 ± 3
Height (cm, mean ± SD)	179.2 ± 5.2	170.5 ± 8.7
Body mass (kg, mean ± SD)	80.0 ± 6.7	68.6 ± 6.9
Menstruation status (no. of participants)		NM days 1-5 = 2
		NM days 6-14 = 2
		NM days 15-21 = 3
		OCP (active pill day) = 2
		IUD = 2
		Contraceptive implant = 1

IUD: intrauterine device; NM: naturally menstruating (cycle length between 21–35 days and at least 9 consecutive periods in a year); OCP: oral contraceptive pill.

Study design

The current study adopted a within-subject, crossover design that implemented an experimental condition (compression garments—COMP) and a control condition (regular exercise tights—CON). Participants attended the laboratory on one occasion to complete two repetitions of an indoor testing battery (one for each garment condition), with a 10-min rest between the first and second testing battery. This testing battery consisted of balance, jumping, sprinting and change of direction tasks (in that order), and garment condition was selected in a randomised, counterbalanced order. The testing order was selected to minimise the effect of physical fatigue on subsequent tasks (Gore et al., 2013).

Garment details

Full-length (waist-to-ankle) compression tights (Pressio Inc., London, United Kingdom) comprised of 80% nylon and 20% Lycra (elastane) were used in the present study. The tights were of a novel design that incorporated additional Lycra elastomeric panels across the anterior thigh and posterior calf (Figure 1). Participants were correctly fitted for the tights by height and body mass according to manufacturer’s recommendations. The control tights were regular, waist-to-ankle exercise tights (Anko, Perth, Australia) comprised of 92% polyester and 8% elastane and fitted according to standard Australian women’s and men’s sizes. Both COMP and CON garments looked very similar in appearance, and participants were told that the purpose of the research was to evaluate two different brands of exercise garments. While it is difficult to account for the possible placebo effect of wearing compression garments, this was our attempt to control for any psychological benefit.

Figure 1. Front (left) and back (right) view of compression tights used in the present study, incorporating additional lycra elastomeric panels across the anterior thigh and posterior calf.

Prior to testing, participants’ thigh and calf girths were measured using a standard steel anthropometric tape measure (Lufkin, Apex Tool Group, MD, USA). Subsequently, the applied garment pressure of both COMP and CON tights was recorded at the lateral ankle (2 cm above the lateral malleolus), posterior aspect of the maximal calf girth and anterior aspect of the maximal thigh girth on the participant’s right leg while in a standing position, using a Kikuhime pressure monitor (MediGroup, Melbourne, Australia). On the COMP tights, the location at which the maximal calf girth measurement was taken corresponded with a Lycra elastromeric panel (see Figure 1). The Kikuhime pressure monitor has previously been shown to be both valid and reliable (Brophy-Williams et al., 2014). Participants wore their normal athletic footwear and ankle socks during trials.

Procedures

Warm up

Each participant performed a standardised warmup prior to the first testing battery, consisting of 5 mins of dynamic exercises including squats, lunges, A-skips and B-skips in standard lab conditions (21 ± 2°C, 54 ± 6% relative humidity). Following this, participants completed three repetitions of a 10 m sprint at increasing speeds, corresponding to 50%, 75% and 100% of subjective maximal effort; and two repetitions per direction (left and right) of the change of direction task, at 50% and 75% of subjective maximal effort. The participants then completed the following tasks in the order and manner presented below.

Single-leg balance task with visual occlusion

Participants were instructed to close their eyes and stand on one leg in the centre of one of two, 400 × 600 mm ground-embedded force platforms (Advanced Mechanical Technology, Inc., Watertown, MA, USA; 1200 Hz), keeping their non-weight-bearing leg raised at approximately the calf level of their stance leg. During the balance task, participants were required to keep their hands resting on their hips but were permitted to move their non-weight-bearing leg to maintain balance. Participants maintained this stance for a maximum of 60 s on each leg as per the protocol described in Michael et al. (2014). The test was terminated if participants opened their eyes, touched their swing leg to the ground or released their hands from their hips, and the time achieved on each leg was recorded by stopwatch. The order in which each leg was tested was randomised for each participant and counterbalanced across conditions. Centre of pressure (CoP) excursions in the anterior-posterior (AP) and medio-lateral (ML) directions were recorded from the ground reaction force data. To reduce measurement noise, CoP data were filtered using a zero-lag fourth-order Butterworth low pass filter, with the cut-off frequency (30 Hz) determined by a residual analysis (Winter, 2009). To objectively determine and standardise the point of trial termination (i.e., losing balance), trials were cut to the last point a participant could maintain 90% body mass on the force platform before task failure, as has been used previously with single-leg postural stability testing (Pryhoda et al., 2020; Riemann et al., 1999). Any trial that did not contain greater than 5 s of continuous data was excluded from analysis (number of trials removed = 8). Subsequently, data were processed in MATLAB (2021b; The MathWorks Inc., Natick, MA) and used to calculate CoP path length (mm), 95% confidence ellipse area (mm²) and path velocity (mm/s) using the equations described in Prieto et al. (1996). Balance and CoP data were first analysed by left and right legs and by condition (COMP v CON), and no significant interactions were found (p = 0.09–0.94). Therefore, data from both legs were pooled and analysed to examine the effect of condition on a single-leg balance task, independent of right or left leg.

Countermovement jump

Participants performed three non-continuous, unloaded countermovement jumps (CMJs) on the same ground-embedded force platforms as the balance task. CMJs were performed with a dowel rod placed across the shoulders with a 10 s rest between trials. Participants were instructed to choose a self-selected countermovement depth and to jump for maximum height. Raw force-time data was obtained using Vicon Nexus (V12, Vicon Motion Systems Ltd., Oxford, UK) and analysed using ForceDecks software (VALD Performance, Newstead, Australia). From the three trials, the jump that produced the greatest jump height (from take-off velocity) was retained for analysis. This method has been shown to reliably determine countermovement jump height in physically active males and females (CV: 2.1–2.5%) (Moir et al., 2009).

Drop jump

Participants completed three non-continuous drop jumps (DJs) from a 45 cm box height with a dowel rod placed across the shoulders. Participants were instructed to step off the box and immediately execute a vertical jump upon impact with the ground-embedded force platforms. Given the unfamiliar nature of this activity, participants were provided an opportunity to complete 2–3 unrecorded practice jumps to improve technique if required. The cueing for this exercise focused on minimising contact time and maximising height, and appropriate feedback was provided after each trial (Young et al., 1995). Trials were considered valid if the contact time was less than 250 milliseconds (Ball et al., 2010). Raw force-time data was obtained from Vicon Nexus and analysed using ForceDecks software (VALD Performance, Albion, Australia). The reactive strength index (RSI) score was calculated for each jump by dividing the jump height (from take-off velocity) by the contact time, with the jump that produced the greatest RSI being retained for analysis. This method of determining RSI has demonstrated acceptable reliability in recreationally active males and females (ICC: 0.94 (95% CI 0.88–0.97)) (Godwin et al., 2020).

Straight-line sprint

Participants completed three straight-line sprints of 10 m each at maximal effort, with approximately 2-min rest in between efforts. The sprints were conducted indoors on linoleum flooring and recorded using three sets of timing gates (Smartspeed, VALD Performance, Newstead, Australia) set up at a height of 90 cm and positioned at 0, 5 and 10-m intervals, with a width of 1.5 m between timing lights and reflectors. Error correction processing was active on the timing gates during data recording. Participants commenced each sprint from an upright, stationary start from a line marked 30 cm behind the first timing gate. The total time for 10 m was recorded for each trial, with the fastest trial used for analysis. The 10 m sprint has demonstrated acceptable reliability (CV: 1.5%) in recreationally trained adult males (Suarez-Arrones et al., 2020).

Change of direction task

A modified Y-shaped test was used to assess pre-planned change of direction and total time was recorded using the timing lights system. As with the straight-line sprint, participants began the test at the same line marked 30 cm behind the first timing gate and ran maximally through the start gate (0 m) and the trigger gate (5 m), before performing a cut towards the left or right-hand direction as instructed prior to the start. A left-hand cut corresponded with cutting from the right leg at the trigger gate, while a right-hand cut corresponded with cutting from the left leg. The final set of gates were set up at an angle of approximately 45° in both the left and right direction, 8.5 m from the centre of the trigger gate (Figure 2). This method of assessing pre-planned change of direction has previously demonstrated acceptable reliability (CV: 1.2–2.4%) in physically active males (Oliver & Meyers, 2009). Three trials were performed for each direction of cut (left and right), in a randomised, counterbalanced order, with the fastest trial for each direction retained for analysis. The data were first analysed by left and right directions and by condition (COMP v CON), and no significant interactions were found (p = 0.28–0.91). Therefore, data from both directions of the task were pooled and analysed to examine the effect of condition (COMP v CON) on a change of direction task, independent of task direction.

Figure 2. Layout of Y-shaped change of direction task using three sets of timing gates.

Statistical analyses

Descriptive statistics (means and standard deviations) were computed for each measure. To assess the potential of a learning effect between the first and second testing batteries, a paired samples t-test was performed for all measures. Subsequently, a linear mixed model (LMM) was conducted to examine the effects of the garment intervention (COMP vs. CON) on all testing measures. The LMM included a fixed effect of condition and a random intercept for participant ID. The assumption of normality was assessed with a Shapiro–Wilk test and visual inspection of a Q-Q plot, with residuals deemed to approximate a normal distribution. However, 95% confidence ellipse area was not normally distributed and therefore was transformed (using log transformation) prior to further analyses. The statistical significance was set at p ≤0.05. In addition, effect size statistics were performed to determine differences between COMP and CON for each measure and expressed as standardised (Cohen’s d) effects. The magnitude of each effect size was interpreted using thresholds of 0.2, 0.5, and 0.8 for small, moderate, and large, respectively (Cohen, 1988). An effect size of < 0.2 was considered trivial. Where the 95% confidence limits overlapped the thresholds for small positive and small negative values, the effect was considered unclear. All statistical analyses were conducted using the jamovi statistical package (jamovi Version 2.3.23, the jamovi project, 2021).

Results

The average applied pressure across all landmarks by the compression tights used in the study was 16.0 ± 3.5 mmHg. COMP applied pressure was significantly higher than CON applied pressure at each bodily landmark (p < 0.001) (Table 2). There were no statistically significant effects for order of testing battery across the assessed tasks, and effect sizes were deemed trivial (p = 0.12–0.67; d = −0.09–0.15).

Table 2. Applied garment pressure for CON and COMP tights by bodily landmark.

	CON	COMP
Ankle (mmHg)	2.5 ± 1.6	11.7 ± 4.7
Calf (mmHg)	8.7 ± 2.6	25.4 ± 4.5
Thigh (mmHg)	4.7 ± 2.3	10.7 ± 3.8

There was a significant main effect of condition on 10 m sprint time (F(1,23) = 5.03, p = 0.03) and CMJ concentric mean force (F(1,21) = 4.52, p = 0.05) in favour of COMP, however the effect sizes were trivial. In addition, there was a significant main effect of condition on change of direction time (F(1,71) = 5.12, p = 0.03) in favour of COMP, and the effect size was small.

There were no statistically significant differences between groups for CMJ concentric duration, CMJ eccentric duration, CMJ eccentric mean force, CMJ flight time: contraction time, CMJ vertical velocity at take-off or CMJ jump height. Additionally, there were no statistically significant differences between groups on DJ contact time, DJ jump height or DJ RSI and effect sizes were trivial or unclear.

There was a significant main effect of condition on 95% confidence ellipse area during a single-leg balance task (F(1,62) = 6.11, p = 0.02). Specifically, the 95% confidence ellipse area (mm²) was smaller on average in COMP and the effect size was small (example data in Figure 3). There were no statistically significant differences between groups on balance time (Figure 4(a)), CoP path length (Figure 4(b)), CoP range (Figure 5) or CoP path velocity during a single-leg balance task. There were small effect sizes in favour of COMP for balance time and path length, while the remaining effect sizes were unclear (Table 3).

Figure 3. Example of centre of pressure (CoP) trace and corresponding 95% confidence ellipse areas for one participant. AP = anterior (+) posterior (-); ML = Mediolateral; COMP = compression; CON = control.

Figure 4. Comparison of balance time (a) and path length (b) for a single-leg visually occluded balance task between conditions. COMP = compression; CON = control; S = small effect size. Bars represent group means (± SD) and lines represent individual results.

Figure 5. CoP range in both directions during single-leg balance task with visual occlusion. AP: anterior-posterior; ML: mediolateral; COMP = compression; CON = control.

Table 3. Summary of measures for control (CON) and compression tights (COMP) conditions (presented as mean ± SD).

				COMP v CON interaction
	Measure	CON	COMP	p-value	ES (d) ± 95% CI
Balance and CoP measures (single leg balance task)	Balance time (s)	30.1 ± 20.4	34.5 ± 22.3	0.16	0.21 ± 0.22, small
	CoP M-L range (mm)^	60.6 ± 28.0	60.2 ± 36.5	0.97	−0.01 ± 0.44, unclear
	CoP A-P range (mm) ^	95.2 ± 28.7	92.4 ± 27.3	0.70	−0.09 ± 0.38, unclear
	Path length (mm) ^	2823.5 ± 1551.8	3167.9 ± 1627.6	0.21	0.22 ± 0.27, small
	Path velocity (mm/s) ^	91.5 ± 19.9	86.4 ± 17.5	0.56	−0.25 ± 0.26, unclear
	95% confidence ellipse area (mm^2) ^	4611.6 ± 3378.5	3348.8 ± 1204.0	0.05	−0.30 ± 0.28, small
Countermovement jump	Concentric duration (ms)	303.0 ± 65.2	286.9 ± 54.2	0.32	−0.24 ± 0.31, unclear
	Concentric mean force (N)	1372.9 ± 232.6	1401.5 ± 227.7	0.05	0.12 ± 0.09, trivial
	Eccentric duration (ms)	520.9 ± 146.1	528.1 ± 103.6	0.69	−0.05 ± 0.32, unclear
	Eccentric mean force (N)	738.1 ± 87.3	732.1 ± 87.1	0.30	−0.07 ± 0.11, trivial
	Flight time: contraction time	0.62 ± 0.2	0.63 ± 0.1	0.60	0.09 ± 0.24, trivial
	Jump height (cm)	31.4 ± 6.2	32.1 ± 5.8	0.12	0.15 ± 0.16, trivial
Drop jump	Contact time (s)	0.23 ± 0.02	0.23 ± 0.03	0.49	−0.16 ± 0.37, unclear
	Jump height (cm)	20.4 ± 8.1	20.3 ± 7.1	0.89	−0.01 ± 0.19, unclear
	RSI (Height/contact time)	90.1 ± 36.7	90.6 ± 31.7	0.93	0.01 ± 0.16, trivial
10 m straight line sprint	Total time (s)	1.97 ± 0.15	1.94 ± 0.15	0.03	−0.18 ± 0.14, trivial
Change of direction task	Time (s)	2.76 ± 0.25	2.71 ± 0.29	0.03	−0.20 ± 0.16, small

A-P: anterior-posterior; CoP: centre of pressure; M-L: mediolateral; RSI: reactive strength index; ^{^}Not including 8 invalid trials which were excluded.

Discussion and implication

The aim of this study was to assess the influence of compression tights on performance during balance, sprinting, jumping and change of direction tasks in recreationally trained individuals. The findings suggest that compression tights may significantly improve performance in short sprint and change of direction tasks when compared to regular exercise tights. In addition, compression tights may result in small improvements in balance and postural stability during a single-leg, visually occluded balance task. However, the differences found were minimal, and unlikely to transfer to any practically meaningful differences between compression tights and regular exercise tights for any of the measures. Further, there were no differences between garment conditions for any of the jumping tasks.

When evaluating performance in a 10 m straight-line sprint, compression tights were associated with significantly reduced total time (by ~ 0.03 s on average), though there was only a trivial effect size observed between conditions. Previous reports have found the typical error for this task to be 0.02–0.03 s in trained males (Duthie et al., 2006; Suarez-Arrones et al., 2020). Given the sample population in the current study, it is likely that the observed difference in 10 m sprint time is within the typical error of the measure for recreationally trained participants and may not have any practical relevance. When considering the influence of CGs on sprint performance of longer distances, previous research has demonstrated no significant changes to 20, 60 or 70 m sprint performance (Doan et al., 2003; Higgins et al., 2009; Loturco et al., 2016). However, CGs were shown to significantly improve repeated sprint performance during the final third of a 30 m sprint protocol, and were associated with favourable changes in muscle activation and sprint biomechanics, including increased step length and reduced hip flexion (Born et al., 2014). While the current study did not show any meaningful change to 10 m sprint performance with the use of CGs, future research could consider kinematic analysis of sprinting while wearing CGs to provide mechanistic insight into the influence of CGs on short sprint performance.

Change of direction performance speed is an important element in team sports as players are repeatedly required to rapidly decelerate and accelerate in a different direction in response to ball and player movement on-field (Young et al., 2015). In the present study, a small, significant difference was observed in favour of COMP for the performance of a modified Y-shaped change of direction test (on average, an improvement of 0.05 s in COMP). This is a similar improvement to that reported by Bernhardt and Anderson (2005) with the use of compression shorts during a T-shaped change of direction test, indicating that both compression shorts and tights may offer a marginal advantage for controlled change of direction tests. Although, these tasks are arguably not as relevant for actual sports performance as an agility task involving reactive decision-making (Young et al., 2015). Both change of direction and agility performance have been scarcely assessed in the literature in relation to the use of compression garments and may be a pertinent focus for future research, given that a large proportion of team sport athletes regularly use such garments during training (Driller & Brophy-Williams, 2016).

Previous investigations have demonstrated an improvement in CMJ height with the use of both compression shorts and tights (Doan et al., 2003; Hong et al., 2022; Rugg & Sternlicht, 2013). However, this measure only represents the outcome of movement and not the underlying neuromuscular capacities contributing to jump performance. As such, the present study considered both eccentric and concentric factors of the CMJ in addition to output and timing metrics (James et al., 2021). Overall, the use of compression tights had no effect on the performance of maximal CMJs, with the exception of a significant improvement in concentric mean force, though the effect size was trivial. However, this did not appear to benefit overall CMJ performance, as there were no differences in flight time: contraction time and jump height between conditions, suggesting the apparent difference is not practically meaningful. While the present study assessed one-off maximal CMJs, previous research indicates the potential benefit of lower-body compression garments in scenarios that involve repeated jumps or jumps while fatigued, such as during team sport-specific circuits (Ravier et al., 2018) or following various running protocols (Hong et al., 2022; Rugg & Sternlicht, 2013), which may be of interest for future investigations. It is also probable that garment composition plays a more substantial role during jumping movements, as previous research demonstrating significant improvements to CMJ height used novel compressive shorts consisting of 75% neoprene that likely had a greater elastic effect than most ‘regular’ CGs (Doan et al., 2003). Similarly, no difference was observed between conditions for the performance of maximal drop jumps, which is consistent with previous reports that have reported no change to measures of performance including jump height and time to fatigue (in a continuous drop jump protocol) (De Britto et al., 2017; Šambaher et al., 2016). It is possible that because of the short contact time involved in completing a correct drop jump (i.e., aiming to be in contact with the ground for less than 250 ms), any potential benefit of compression garments on power production is negated and therefore, drop jump performance is unchanged compared to when wearing regular exercise tights.

Balance is a fundamental aspect of postural control and athletic performance, which was assessed through total balance time and CoP measurements in the present study. The results demonstrate that compression tights may have a small, positive effect on total balance time (on average, an improvement of 4.4 s) during a timed, visually occluded single-leg balance task. As a function of total balance time—which was descriptively longer in COMP—path length (mm) was also longer compared to CON, though path velocity was unchanged between conditions. This is comparable to Michael et al. (2014) who reported a significantly greater balance time on the dominant leg in well-fitted compression tights compared to regular shorts during the same balance task. Given the difficulty of the prescribed task, where participants had a reduced base of support and no visual input to assist posture and balance, this small improvement in balance time with COMP is notable. However, postural control during a static balance task may not accurately reflect dynamic balance ability required for various sports, and this small lab-based difference may not transfer to real world performance. CoP data in the current study present information on the strategies used to maintain balance by participants, for example through computation of the 95% confidence ellipse area which represents the dispersion of CoP data and thereby presents an objective measure of stability. In the COMP condition, it appears that participants may have been more stable during the balance task as the 95% confidence ellipse area was significantly (p = 0.05) smaller in COMP when compared to CON. It has previously been suggested that in the absence of visual input, CGs may improve joint positional sense to maintain postural control (Michael et al., 2014). With this in mind, future studies may consider kinematic indices of postural stability (e.g., hip, knee and ankle joint velocities) while wearing CGs and whether these explain any potential improvements in balance with the use of such garments.

While the present study demonstrated only minor improvements in performance with the use of compression tights, this is not the only reason that these garments may be worn during exercise. For example, athletes may use CGs to improve clothing or thermal comfort, reduce rating of perceived exertion or reduce perceived muscle soreness following exercise (Areces et al., 2015; Faulkner et al., 2013). As well, the choice to use performance tools or strategies such as compression garments, is often influenced more greatly by an individual’s past experiences, observations and feelings about the strategy than it is by empirically informed evidence (Simjanovic et al., 2009). Therefore, while the evidence for potential performance improvements with CGs is limited, this should not dissuade athletes from choosing to use the garments if they wish to, given there is minimal risk of performance decrement or harm.

Some limitations should be considered when interpreting the results of this study. First, the participants in the present study were of a recreational training level only, and therefore results cannot be extrapolated to athletes of a higher competitive level. Secondly, task performance was assessed in a non-fatigued state, which may not represent actual performance during a competition or strenuous training bout where the effect of CGs may be different. Furthermore, the prior beliefs of the participants regarding compression garments and their effectiveness were not recorded in this study, though such beliefs may have the potential to influence performance (Stickford et al., 2015). Finally, choosing the size of compression garments for participants based on their height and weight may lead to inadequate garment fit as there is substantial inter-individual variability in limb circumferences (and therefore garment pressure) within standard sizes (Brubacher et al., 2017).

Conclusion

The findings of this study suggest that compression tights may offer small benefits to performance of balance, sprinting, and change of direction tasks, however these benefits are likely within the typical error of measurement for the tests used. Future research could consider kinematic analysis of postural stability and sprinting to better understand the mechanisms underlying the observed improvements in these tasks, as well as performance during agility tasks rather than controlled change-of-direction tasks.

Disclosure statement

The authors report there are no competing interests to declare. The compression tights used in the current study were supplied by the company (Pressio Inc., London, United Kingdom) free of charge, however the company had no input into the design, analysis or reporting of results from this study.

Additional information

Funding

The author(s) reported there is no funding associated with the work featured in this article.