Use of Topical Analgesic and Rolling Alone or in Combination Does Not Increase Flexibility, Pain Pressure Threshold, and Fatigue Endurance—A Repeated-Measures Randomized, Within-Subjects, Exploratory Study

Behm, David G.; Duffett, Colin; Wiseman, Shawn; Halperin, Israel

doi:10.25036/jphr.2018.2.1.behm

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Participants were instructed to perform the routine with the roller massager so that the perceived pain would not exceed a 7 out of 10 threshold on the Numeric Pain Scale (0: "No pain", 10: "Most pain") [4,27]. This subjective control is widely used in SMR experiments [28][29][30].…”

Section: Plos Onementioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating the effects of embedded self-massage practice on strength performance: A randomized crossover pilot trial

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Self-administered massage interventions with a roller massager are commonly used as part of warm-ups and post-workout recovery routines. There is yet no clear consensus regarding the practical guidelines for efficient embedded interventions. Objectives The present randomized crossover pilot trial aimed at examining the effects of a rolling intervention with a roller massager embedded within the rests periods of a resistance training protocol. The rolling intervention targeted quadriceps muscles. Setting Participants (n = 14) performed two resistance training protocols expected to elicit momentary muscle failure. The protocol consisted in 10 sets of 10 rest-pause repetitions of back squats, with a poundage set up at 50% of the maximal one-repetition. Two min were allocated to recovery between sets. During the recovery periods, participants completed a rolling routine with a roller massager for 60 s (Roller-massager), or underwent passive recovery (Control). The total workload, concentric power, thigh circumference rate of perceived exertion (RPE) and delayed onset of muscle soreness (DOMS) from 24 h to 120 h after completion of the protocol were the dependent variables. Results Roller-massager was associated with a reduction in total workload (-11.6%), concentric power (-5.1%) and an increase in perceived exertion compared to Control (p < 0.05). Roller-massager was also associated with reduced thigh circumference after the resistance training protocol, indicating reduced muscle swelling, and reduced DOMS 24 h to 120 h post-workout (p < 0.001). Conclusion These findings support that embedded rolling with a roller massager hinders performance and increases effort perception. Embedded interventions may not be suitable during conditioning periods designed to maximize training intensity.

show abstract