No abstract

No abstract

Background Foam roller and vibration techniques are currently used to assist in recovery after fatigue. The main purpose of this study was to determine the effects of the use of a foam roller with and without vibration on dynamic balance, ankle dorsiflexion, hamstring and lumbar spine flexibility and perceived knee and ankle stability after an induced fatigue protocol. Methods A total of 24 healthy recreationally active participants (17 males and seven females) were recruited to a randomized cross over trial consisting of; no treatment (NT), foam roller treatment (FR) and vibration foam roller treatment (VFR). The assessments included; the Sit & Reach test, Y balance test and post-treatment perceived knee and ankle stability. Measurements were taken after a standardized warm up (baseline) and repeated following an exercise-induced muscle fatigue protocol consisting of repeated lunges until volitional fatigue. The three treatment conditions were assessed on three separate days in a randomized order. A 3 × 3 repeated measures ANOVA was used to investigate differences between the three treatments over the three time points and a one factor repeated measures ANOVA was used to determine any differences between treatments using the Global Rate of Change scale when considering perceived stability. Results FR and VFR conditions both showed a greater ankle dorsiflexion range of motion (ROM) (p < 0.001), greater posteromedial and posterolateral reach distances (p < 0.001) and a better knee and ankle perceived stability (p < 0.001) when compared to the NT condition. A trend toward significance was observed in the hamstring and lumbar spine flexibility (p = 0.074) in both treatment conditions when compared to the NT condition. However, no differences were seen between the FR and VFR conditions. Conclusions Both FR conditions seem to assist in exercise-induced muscle fatigue recovery with improvements in ROM, balance and perceived stability.

These studies highlight a negative impact of a basal cycle high FSH:LH ratio (and possibly low LH levels) on follicular development and oocyte quality in these patients subjected to pituitary down-regulation followed by pure FSH administration. A high FSH:LH ratio may be therefore used as an early biomarker of poor ovarian response.