Effects of Static Stretching and Foam Rolling on Ankle Dorsiflexion Range of Motion

Smith, J. W. G.; Washell, Brandi R; Aini, Mary Frances; Brown, Sydney Park; Hall, MacGregor

doi:10.1249/mss.0000000000001964

Cited by 26 publications

(35 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, the vast majority of articles published since January 2018 confirm the pooled effects of FR, which are calculated in this meta-analysis. For example, Cheatham and Stull (2018), de Souza et al (2019), Hall and Chadwick Smith (2018), Killen et al (2018), Macgregor et al (2018), Madoni et al (2018), Monteiro et al (2018, 2019a,b), and Smith et al (2018, 2019) were able to confirm that FR can improve flexibility, perceived muscle pain perception, and/or the recovery of strength performance, while Madoni et al (2018) found that FR had no effect on jump performance.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Meta-Analysis of the Effects of Foam Rolling on Performance and Recovery

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Foam rolling is thought to improve muscular performance and flexibility as well as to alleviate muscle fatigue and soreness. For this reason, foam rolling has become a popular intervention in all kinds of sport settings used to increase the efficiency of training or competition preparation as well as to speed post-exercise recovery. The objective of this meta-analysis was to compare the effects of foam rolling applied before (pre-rolling as a warm-up activity) and after (post-rolling as a recovery strategy) exercise on sprint, jump, and strength performance as well as on flexibility and muscle pain outcomes and to identify whether self-massage with a foam roller or a roller massager is more effective. A comprehensive and structured literature search was performed using the PubMed, Google Scholar, PEDro, and Cochrane Library search engines. Twenty-one studies were located that met the inclusion criteria. Fourteen studies used pre-rolling, while seven studies used post-rolling. Pre-rolling resulted in a small improvement in sprint performance (+0.7%, g = 0.28) and flexibility (+4.0%, g = 0.34), whereas the effect on jump (−1.9%, g = 0.09) and strength performance (+1.8%, g = 0.12) was negligible. Post-rolling slightly attenuated exercise-induced decreases in sprint (+3.1%, g = 0.34) and strength performance (+3.9 %, g = 0.21). It also reduced muscle pain perception (+6.0%, g = 0.47), whereas its effect on jump performance (−0.2%, g = 0.06) was trivial. Of the twenty-one studies, fourteen used foam rollers, while the other seven used roller massage bars/sticks. A tendency was found for foam rollers to offer larger effects on the recovery of strength performance (+5.6%, g = 0.27 vs. −0.1%, g = −0.01) than roller massagers. The differences in the effects between foam rolling devices in terms of pre-rolling did not seem to be of practical relevance (overall performance: +2.7 %, g = 0.11 vs. +0.4%, g = 0.21; flexibility: +5.0%, g = 0.32 vs. +1.6%, g = 0.39). Overall, it was determined that the effects of foam rolling on performance and recovery are rather minor and partly negligible, but can be relevant in some cases (e.g., to increase sprint performance and flexibility or to reduce muscle pain sensation). Evidence seems to justify the widespread use of foam rolling as a warm-up activity rather than a recovery tool.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Meta-Analysis of the Effects of Foam Rolling on Performance and Recovery

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…At each beep, the examiner foam moved the massager one stroke up or down. The intensity was steered based on the participants' feedback, targeting a 7/10 in discomfort on a numerical rating scale (0, no discomfort; 10, maximal discomfort) (Smith et al, 2019;Kiyono et al, 2020a). Based on previous studies, participants performed three sets of RM for 60 s with a 30-s break between sets (Smith et al, 2019;Behm et al, 2020;Kiyono et al, 2020a).…”

Section: Rm Interventionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Local and Non-local Effects of Foam Rolling on Passive Soft Tissue Properties and Spinal Excitability

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In sports and clinical settings, roller massage (RM) interventions are used to acutely increase range of motion (ROM); however, the underlying mechanisms are unclear. Apart from changes in soft tissue properties (i.e., reduced passive stiffness), neurophysiological alterations such as decreased spinal excitability have been described. However, to date, no study has investigated both jointly. The purpose of this trial was to examine RM’s effects on neurophysiological markers and passive tissue properties of the plantar flexors in the treated (ROLL) and non-treated (NO-ROLL) leg. Fifteen healthy individuals (23 ± 3 years, eight females) performed three unilateral 60-s bouts of calf RM. This procedure was repeated four times on separate days to allow independent assessments of the following outcomes without reciprocal interactions: dorsiflexion ROM, passive torque during passive dorsiflexion, shear elastic modulus of the medial gastrocnemius muscle, and spinal excitability. Following RM, dorsiflexion ROM increased in both ROLL (+19.7%) and NO-ROLL (+13.9%). Similarly, also passive torque at dorsiflexion ROM increased in ROLL (+15.0%) and NO-ROLL (+15.2%). However, there were no significant changes in shear elastic modulus and spinal excitability (p > 0.05). Moreover, significant correlations were observed between the changes in DF ROM and passive torque at DF ROM in both ROLL and NO-ROLL. Changes in ROM after RM appear to be the result of sensory changes (e.g., passive torque at DF ROM), affecting both rolled and non-rolled body regions. Thus, therapists and exercise professionals may consider applying remote treatments if local loading is contraindicated.

show abstract

“…Protocols usually involved 2-5 sessions per week delivered within a span of 3-8 weeks. The use of a ball or foam roller demonstrated its usefulness for improving shoulder, knee, or ankle ROM (Le Gal et al, 2018;Smith et al, 2019), without harmful consequences on physical performance (Hodgson et al, 2019). Regular combination of FR and static stretching may have an additional effect for increasing ROM (Mohr et al, 2014;Škarabot et al, 2015).…”

Section: Long-term Interventionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Selective Effects of Manual Massage and Foam Rolling on Perceived Recovery and Performance: Current Knowledge and Future Directions Toward Robotic Massages

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Manual massage and foam rolling are commonly used by athletes for warm-up and recovery, as well as by healthy individuals for well-being. Manual massage is an ancient practice requiring the intervention of an experienced physiotherapist, while foam rolling is a more recent self-administered technique. These two topics have been largely studied in isolation from each other. In the present review, we first provide a deep quantitative literature analysis to gather the beneficial effects of each technique through an integrative account, as well as their psychometric and neurophysiological evaluations. We then conceptually consider the motor control strategies induced by each type of massage. During manual massage, the person remains passive, lying on the massage table, and receives unanticipated manual pressure by the physiotherapist, hence resulting in a retroactive mode of action control with an ongoing central integration of proprioceptive feedback. In contrast, while performing foam rolling, the person directly exerts pressures through voluntary actions to manipulate the massaging tool, therefore through a predominant proactive mode of action control, where operations of forward and inverse modeling do not require sensory feedback. While these opposite modes of action do not seem to offer any compromise, we then discuss whether technological advances and collaborative robots might reconcile proactive and retroactive modes of action control during a massage, and offer new massage perspectives through a stochastic sensorimotor user experience. This transition faculty, from one mode of control to the other, might definitely represent an innovative conceptual approach in terms of human-machine interactions.

show abstract

Effects of Static Stretching and Foam Rolling on Ankle Dorsiflexion Range of Motion

Cited by 26 publications

References 42 publications

A Meta-Analysis of the Effects of Foam Rolling on Performance and Recovery

A Meta-Analysis of the Effects of Foam Rolling on Performance and Recovery

Local and Non-local Effects of Foam Rolling on Passive Soft Tissue Properties and Spinal Excitability

Selective Effects of Manual Massage and Foam Rolling on Perceived Recovery and Performance: Current Knowledge and Future Directions Toward Robotic Massages

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About