Expert Consensus on the Contraindications and Cautions of Foam Rolling—An International Delphi Study (original) (raw)
Related papers
Foam Rolling Prescription: A Clinical Commentary
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 2020
Although the foam rolling and roller massage literature generally reports acute increases in range of motion (ROM) with either trivial or small performance improvements, there is little information regarding appropriate rolling prescription. The objective of this literature review was to appraise the evidence and provide the best prescriptive recommendations for rolling to improve ROM and performance. The recommendations represent studies with the greatest magnitude effect size increases in ROM and performance. A systematic search of the rolling-related literature found in PubMed, ScienceDirect, Web of Science, and Google Scholar was conducted using related terms such as foam rolling, roller massage, ROM, flexibility, performance, and others. From the measures within articles that monitored ROM (25), strength (41), jump (41), fatigue (67), and sprint (62) variables; regression correlations and predictive quadratic equations were formulated for number of rolling sets, repetition frequency, set duration, and rolling intensity. The analysis revealed the following conclusions. To achieve the greatest ROM, the regression equations predicted rolling prescriptions involving 1-3 sets of 2-4-second repetition duration (time for a single roll in one direction over the length of a body part) with a total rolling duration of 30-120-second per set. Based on the fewer performance measures, there were generally trivial to small magnitude decreases in strength and jump measures. In addition, there was insufficient evidence to generalize on the effects of rolling on fatigue and sprint measures. In summary, relatively small volumes of rolling can improve ROM with generally trivial to small effects on strength and jump performance.
A Meta-Analysis of the Effects of Foam Rolling on Performance and Recovery
Frontiers in Physiology
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.
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
Foam rolling (FR) is a new and popular technique for increasing range of motion. While there are a few studies that demonstrate increased performance measures after an acute bout of FR, the overall evidence indicates trivial performance benefits. As there have been no meta-analyses on the effects of chronic FR on performance, the objective of this systematic meta-analytical review was to quantify the effects of FR training on performance. We searched PubMed, Scopus, the Cochrane library, and Web of Science for FR training studies with a duration greater than two weeks, and found eight relevant studies. We used a random effect meta-analysis that employed a mixed-effect model to identify subgroup analyses. GRADE analysis was used to gauge the quality of the evidence obtained from this meta-analysis. Egger’s regression intercept test (intercept 1.79; p = 0.62) and an average PEDro score of 6.25 (±0.89) indicated no or low risk of reporting bias, respectively. GRADE analysis indicated t...
Acute Effects of Two Different Foam Rollers on Range of Motion
Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 2017
The aim of this study was to determine if differences existed between the effects two different foam rollers had on hip and shoulder ROM. Ten college students participated in a random cross over design study. Participants' hip and shoulder ROM were measured with a goniometer pre and post three different conditions: control, Supernova (SN), and Grid. The first session consisted of taking pre ROM measurements followed by 10 minutes of rest and post ROM measurements (control). Then the participants were familiarized with the foam rolling procedures that were used for the next two sessions. During the next two sessions the control
Foam Rolling as a Recovery Tool after an Intense Bout of Physical Activity
Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 2014
Purpose: The objective of this study is to understand the effectiveness of foam rolling (FR) as a recovery tool after exercise-induced muscle damage, analyzing thigh girth, muscle soreness, range of motion (ROM), evoked and voluntary contractile properties, vertical jump, perceived pain while FR, and force placed on the foam roller. Methods: Twenty male subjects (Q3 yr of strength training experience) were randomly assigned into the control (n = 10) or FR (n = 10) group. All the subjects followed the same testing protocol. The subjects participated in five testing sessions: 1) orientation and one-repetition maximum back squat, 2) pretest measurements, 10 Â 10 squat protocol, and POST-0 (posttest 0) measurements, along with measurements at 3) POST-24, 4) POST-48, and 5) POST-72. The only between-group difference was that the FR group performed a 20-min FR exercise protocol at the end of each testing session (POST-0, POST-24, and POST-48). Results: FR substantially reduced muscle soreness at all time points while substantially improving ROM. FR negatively affected evoked contractile properties with the exception of half relaxation time and electromechanical delay (EMD), with FR substantially improving EMD. Voluntary contractile properties showed no substantial between-group differences for all measurements besides voluntary muscle activation and vertical jump, with FR substantially improving muscle activation at all time points and vertical jump at POST-48. When performing the five FR exercises, measurements of the subjects' force placed on the foam roller and perceived pain while FR ranged between 26 and 46 kg (32%-55% body weight) and 2.5 and 7.5 points, respectively. Conclusion: The most important findings of the present study were that FR was beneficial in attenuating muscle soreness while improving vertical jump height, muscle activation, and passive and dynamic ROM in comparison with control. FR negatively affected several evoked contractile properties of the muscle, except for half relaxation time and EMD, indicating that FR benefits are primarily accrued through neural responses and connective tissue.
Trials
Background: Self-myofascial release (SMR) aims to mimic the effects of manual therapy and tackle dysfunctions of the skeletal muscle and connective tissue. It has been shown to induce improvements in flexibility, but the underlying mechanisms are still poorly understood. In addition to neuronal mechanisms, improved flexibility may be driven by acute morphological adaptations, such as a reduction in passive tissue stiffness or improved movement between fascial layers. The aim of the intended study is to evaluate the acute effects of SMR on the passive tissue stiffness of the anterior thigh muscles and the sliding properties of the associated fasciae. Methods: In a crossover study design, 16 participants will receive all of the following interventions in a permutated random order: (1) one session of 2 × 60 s of SMR at the anterior thigh, (2) one session of 2 × 60 s of passive static stretching of the anterior thigh and (3) no intervention. Passive tissue stiffness, connective tissue sliding, angle of first stretch sensation, as well as maximal active and passive knee flexion angle, will be evaluated before and directly after each intervention. Discussion: The results of the intended study will allow a better understanding of, and provide further evidence on, the local effects of SMR techniques and the underlying mechanisms for flexibility improvements.
Postural exercises on the foam roll
Journal of Bodywork and Movement Therapies, 2010
Upright posture is a challenge to maintain. Chairs, desks, and computers all conspire with gravity to round our back and shoulders forward. Stress also is often felt as a ''weight of the world'' on our shoulders. For all these reasons and more, upright posture is hard to maintain. Our upright posture develops gradually from the fetal position in the womb. By 1 month of life an infant can raise the head to look straight ahead. By 3 months, an infant arches the low back into extension away from the fetal, slumped forward posture. By the end of the first year, supported upright walking is possible and by 4 years old most young children can stand upright like an adult and balance on 1 leg. Unfortunately, excessive sitting at desks in our schools, and slouching on soft chairs and couches at home in front of the television poison this innate upright posture that we achieve. Slumping, slouching and stooping become a programmed habit. The effects of poor posture are seen everywhere, and include loss of energy, headaches, neck or back pain, pinched nerves, etc. This self-care handout will show you how to utilize a foam roll to gain better conscious awareness of good posture so that this will again become a subconscious habit in all your daily activities. These exercises are designed to help you compensate for the environmental pollution of prolonged sitting and sedentarism. They act like a computer anti-virus program!
Foam Rolling, Elbow Proprioception, Strength, and Functional Motor Performance
Journal of Athletic Training, 2021
Context Foam rolling has recently been used frequently to increase flexibility. However, its effects on proprioception, strength, and motor performance are not well known. In addition, very few researchers have examined the effects of foam rolling on the upper extremity. Objective To investigate the effects of foam rolling on elbow proprioception, strength, and functional motor performance in healthy individuals. Design Randomized controlled clinical trial. Setting Exercise laboratory of School of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation, Dokuz Eylul University. Patients or Other Participants Sixty healthy participants (mean age = 22.83 ± 4.07 years). Intervention(s) We randomly assigned participants to 2 groups: the foam-rolling group (FRG; 4 weeks of foam rolling for the biceps brachii muscle) or control group (CG; no foam rolling). Main Outcome Measure(s) We evaluated proprioception (joint position sense [JPS] and force matching), biceps brachii muscle strength, and functional motor p...