Comparison of the effects of different foam rolling durations on knee extensors function.

Foam rolling (FR) intervention has recently attracted attention in sports and rehabilitation settings. However, the effects of FR using different rolling durations have not been fully clarified. Thus, this study focused on FR durations and examined the acute and prolonged (i.e., 20-min; 40-min, 60-min) effects of different FR intervention durations on maximal voluntary concentric contractions (MVC-CON), knee flexion range of motion (ROM), pain pressure threshold (PPT), and tissue hardness. The participants were 10 male university students (22.5 ± 1.0 years), and the target muscles were the dominant leg knee extensors. Three sets of 60-seconds FR interventions were performed in the randomized crossover trials in each condition. The three intervention conditions were fast (1 rolling/2 s, 30-repetition × 3 sets, 90 repetitions), medium (1 rolling/6 s, 10-repetition × 3 sets, 30 repetitions), and slow speed (1 rolling/12 s, 5-repetition × 3 sets, 15 repetitions). Before as well as immediately, 20-min, 40-min, and 60-min after the interventions, MVC-CON, ROM PPT, and tissue hardness were measured. The results showed no interaction effect in the acute effect but a main effect of time for all variables (p < 0.05). Also, no interaction was observed in prolonged effect, but main effects of time were observed in knee flexion ROM, PPT, and tissue hardness (p < 0.01) but not for MVC-CON. Post-hoc tests showed significant PPT (p < 0.05) and knee flexion ROM (p < 0.01) increases up to 20- and 60-minutes respectively after all interventions. Tissue hardness was significantly (p < 0.01) decreased up to 60-minutes after all interventions. This study showed that the FR intervention changed ROM, PPT, tissue hardness, and MVC-CON regardless of rolling duration and that the effects persisted up to 20-60 minutes.

An Intense Warm-Up Does Not Potentiate Performance Before or After a Single Bout of Foam Rolling.

Foam rolling (FR) is a common intervention used as a warm-up to increase the range of motion (ROM) of a joint, without changes in subsequent performance. It has been shown that, in similar techniques (e.g., stretching), an additional intense warm-up can lead to performance potentiation. However, to date, it is not clear if this also holds true for FR, and if this effect is similar in both sexes. Thus, the purpose of this study was to compare the effects of an intense warm-up either before or after FR with the effects of FR without any additional intense warm-up, in both females and males. In total, 27 volunteers (14 male, 13 female) visited the laboratory on three separate days. Each participant was randomly assigned to one of the three interventions. ROM was assessed with a Sit n' Reach box, and countermovement jump (CMJ) height with a force plate, both before and after the interventions. In addition, maximum voluntary isometric contraction (MVIC) peak torque and maximum voluntary dynamic contraction (MVDC) peak torque were assessed with a dynamometer. ROM increased to the same extent following the interventions in all groups, with a large magnitude of change (P < 0.001; d = 1.12 to 1.83). In addition, male participants showed significantly higher increases in ROM when the intense warm-up was performed after FR (P < 0.001; d = 1.44), but not without the intense warm-up (P = 0.45; d = 0.57) or when the intense warm-up was performed before FR (P = 0.24; d = 0.69). No significant changes in CMJ height, MVIC peak torque, or MVDC peak torque were observed (P > 0.05). We therefore conclude that the time-efficient athlete might skip further intense warm-up, besides FR, when the goal is to increase ROM and to sustain performance parameters.

A Comparison of the Effects of Foam Rolling and Stretching on Physical Performance. A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Foam rolling and stretching with its various techniques are frequently used as a warm-up routine to increase the range of motion of a joint. While the magnitude of the changes in range of motion between foam rolling and stretching (static and dynamic techniques) is similar, it is not clear if this also holds true for performance parameters (e.g., strength, jump height). The purpose of this meta-analysis was to compare the effects of an acute bout of foam rolling (with and without vibration) with an acute bout of stretching (with all techniques included) on performance parameters in healthy participants. We assessed the results from 13 studies and 35 effect sizes by applying a random-effect meta-analysis. Moreover, by applying a mixed-effect model, we performed subgroup analyses with the stretching technique, type of foam rolling, tested muscle, treatment duration, and type of task. We found no significant overall effect, and the analysis revealed only a trend of the performance parameters in favor of foam rolling when compared to stretching (when considering all techniques). Significantly favorable effects of foam rolling on performance were detected with subgroup analyses when compared to static stretching, when applied to some muscles (e.g., quadriceps) or some tasks (e.g., strength), when applied for longer than 60 s, or when the foam rolling included vibration. When foam rolling was compared to dynamic stretching or applied in the non-vibration mode, the same magnitude of effect was observed. While the present meta-analysis revealed no significantly different effect between foam rolling and stretching (including all techniques) prior to exercise, differences could be observed under specific conditions.

The Accumulated Effects of Foam Rolling Combined with Stretching on Range of Motion and Physical Performance: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Although it is well known that both stretching and foam rolling can acutely increase the range of motion (ROM) and affect performance, the effects of a combined treatment (foam rolling and stretching) are not yet clear. Hence, the purpose of this meta-analysis was to compare the combined effect to that of stretching or foam rolling alone on both ROM and performance. We assessed the effect of a combined treatment on ROM and compared it to the effect of stretching, foam rolling, and a control condition by applying a random-effect meta-analysis. We also applied the same model to compare the effect of the combined treatment on performance. Moreover, by applying a mixed-effect model, we performed subgroup analyses with the stretching technique, type of foam rolling, tested muscles, type of task, and the order of the combined treatment. We found a significant overall effect on ROM change when comparing the combined treatment with the control condition (effect size (ES) = -0.332); however, no significant effect was found when comparing it to stretching (ES = 0.032) or foam rolling alone (ES = -0.225). The meta-analysis revealed no significant overall effect on performance when the combined treatment was compared to stretching alone (ES = -0.029). However, the subgroup analysis for performance revealed a superior effect for the combined treatment compared to stretching alone, but only if foam rolling was followed by stretching (ES = -0.17), and not vice versa. Athletes do not have to combine stretching with foam rolling since no additional effect was observed. However, to increase performance, the combination of foam rolling followed by stretching can lead to greater improvements.

The Immediate Effects of Self-Myofacial Release on Flexibility, Jump Performance and Dynamic Balance Ability.

Self-myofascial release (SMR) is a popular method to potentially increase the compliance and extensibility of the fascia and reduce muscle stiffness. The purpose of this study was to examine the acute effects of posterior muscle chain SMR on flexibility, vertical jump performance and balance ability. Eighteen young participants volunteered to take part in this crossover design study. They performed two self-massage sessions in randomized order separated by at least one week. One session consisted of posterior muscle chain SMR whereas the other one was performed on the upper limbs as a control intervention (CON). Flexibility was measured with the Toe Touch Test (TTT), Weight-Bearing Lunge Test (WBLT), and Straight Leg Raise Test (SLR). Jump performance was evaluated during a squat jump, a counter movement jump and a stiffness jump. Dynamic balance ability was assessed through the Star Excursion Balance Test. All these variables were measured before and after each intervention. A significant increase in flexibility (+3.5 ± 1.8 cm, +1.6 ± 1.0°, and +7.7 ± 4.0° for the TTT, WLBT, and SLR, respectively, p < 0.003) and balance performance (4.8 ± 3.9 cm, p < 0.003) was observed following SMR intervention compared to CON. Conversely, jumping performance was unchanged in both groups. SMR improves joint flexibility and dynamic balance ability.

Rolling massage acutely improves skeletal muscle oxygenation and parameters associated with microvascular reactivity: The first evidence-based study.

Although it has been claimed that rolling massage (RM), may lead to improvements in skeletal muscle oxygenation, metabolism, blood flow, and vascular function, scientific evidence has not yet been provided. Thus, the current study investigated the effects of 30 s and 2 min of RM on forearm muscle oxygenation, parameters associated with oxidative metabolism, and microvascular reactivity as well as brachial artery endothelial function. Forearm skeletal muscle parameters were assessed in 12 healthy young men (26 ± 6 yrs) using near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS) combined with a 5-min vascular occlusion test. Additionally, brachial artery endothelial function was simultaneously assessed by measuring the relative change in brachial artery diameter normalized to the hyperemic blood flow (Normalized %FMD). These measurements were performed before and after the RM interventions performed on the anterior forearm muscles. Forearm muscle oxygenation increased after 30 s of RM (62 ± 7 to 71 ± 11%; p = 0.02) while there was no change from baseline to post-intervention after 2 min of RM. No change was observed for oxidative metabolism, however, the significant main effect (p = 0.02) for NIRS-derived reperfusion slope (%·s-1) indicated that microvascular function improved after both 30 s (2.30 ± 0.5 to 2.61 ± 0.70%·s-1) and 2 min of RM (2.33 ± 0.4 to 2.60 ± 0.85%·s-1). The lack of significant effects of RM on Normalized %FMD suggest that the RM did not acutely improve brachial artery endothelial function. These findings provide, for the first time, evidence that RM improves skeletal muscle oxygenation and parameters associated with microvascular reactivity. Additionally, RM increased brachial artery blood flow, but not upstream brachial artery endothelial function.

Sedentary behaviour at work increases muscle stiffness of the back: Why roller massage has potential as an active break intervention.

There is increasing evidence that subjects who are exposed to long sitting periods suffer from musculoskeletal discomfort and back pain. The underlying mechanism and effective prevention strategies are still largely unknown. In this study, muscle stiffness of the back was measured in 59 office workers who followed their usual desk work regime for 4.5 h in a sitting posture. The sitting period was either followed by an 8-min roller massage intervention or a controlled standing task. Results showed that muscle stiffness increased significantly after the 4.5 h sitting period. When the sitting period was followed by roller massage, the stiffness values dropped slightly below baseline stiffness. In contrast, the stiffness values remained increased when the sitting period was followed by controlled standing. This study indicates that short-duration tissue manipulation can be an effective active break between prolonged sitting periods to prevent musculoskeletal issues, such as musculoskeletal discomfort and back pain.