The Effects of Light Pressure Instrument-Assisted Soft Tissue Mobilization at Different Rates on Grip Strength and Muscle Stiffness in Healthy Individuals

Abstract

Context: Instrument-assisted soft tissue mobilization (IASTM) is a popular myofascial treatment utilized by health care professionals. Currently, there is a lack of research on the effects of a light pressure IASTM treatment on the forearm region. The purpose of this study was to explore the effects of a light pressure IASTM technique at different application rates on grip strength and muscle stiffness. This study was considered exploratory with the goal of establishing methodology for future controlled studies. Design: Observational pretest and posttest clinical study. Methods: Twenty-six healthy adults underwent one light pressure IASTM treatment to their dominant forearm muscles. Participants were allocated to 2 groups of 13 based upon treatment rate: 60 beats per minute and 120 beats per minute. Participants were tested pretreatment and posttreatment for grip strength and tissue stiffness via diagnostic ultrasound. One-way analyses of covariance were used to assess group differences posttreatment for grip strength and tissue stiffness. Results: Statistically significant posttreatment changes for grip strength and tissue stiffness were not found. Despite the nonstatistical significance, there were small decreases in grip strength and tissue stiffness. Faster (120 beats/min) IASTM application may have produced clinically meaningful decreases in grip strength along with a small decrease in tissue stiffness. Conclusions: This report helps to establish methodology for future controlled studies on this topic. Sports medicine professionals should consider these results as exploratory and interpret them with caution. Future research is needed to confirm these findings and begin to postulate possible neurophysiological mechanisms.

Implementing A Flexible Sensor to Identify Forces during Instrument-Assisted Soft Tissue Mobilization

“…Thus, IASTM researchers have investigated the effectiveness of light pressure to optimize treatments. Preliminary evidence that IASTM works from a neurophysiological mechanism is supported by findings of modulated grip strength [7] improved tactile discrimination [11] and increased blood flow [26] following light pressure IASTM. While each of these studies demonstrated that lighter forces can be effective, there is also evidence that increased forces stimulate connective tissue remodeling, reduce fascial adhesions, and break down scar tissue that limit ROM [4,27,28].…”

“…Theories for neurophysiological effects from IASTM suggest that activation of lowthreshold mechanoreceptors in the dermis (e.g., Pacinian corpuscles, Meissner corpuscle, Merkle's disks) can be used to modify pain or increase blood flow [7,24,25]. Gentle mechanical forces have been found to stimulate the activation of these mechanoreceptors [24,25] and result in pain relief [24].…”

“…More shallow treatment angles of 45 and 30 • have also been used by researchers investigating the effects of IASTM on joint ROM [6,12,37] and DOMS [11]. However, treatment forces during these investigations were either not reported [35,37], estimated by using the weight of the instrument [7,11], or quantified without reporting the reliability of the measurement device [12]. As simulated treatments within the range of 90-45 • were found to be within the capabilities of the ELF measurement system to measure forces accurately and reliably; the inclusion of force measures during IASTM could elucidate how force factors into achieving increased tissue temperatures [35] or increases in shoulder ROM [37].…”

“…Clinicians have reported a preference for using instruments in certain clinical scenarios because IASTM is thought to promote healing, increase range of motion, and improve patient outcomes [5,6]. Proposed mechanisms of action for IASTM are theorized to arise from either neurophysiological effects or mechanical effects on tissues [7]. The different theorized mechanisms of action for IASTM, either neurophysiological or mechanical, suggest that various treatment forces may have the potential to achieve positive therapeutic outcomes.…”