Acute Effects of Foam Rolling on Range of Motion in Healthy Adults: A Systematic Review with Multilevel Meta-analysis

Wilke, Jan; Müller, Annalena; Giesche, Florian; Power, Gerard; Ahmedi, Hamid; Behm, David G.

doi:10.1007/s40279-019-01205-7

Cited by 109 publications

(163 citation statements)

References 62 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

143

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Mizuno et al investigated the prolonged effect of 300 s static stretching intervention on DF ROM and showed that DF ROM returned to baseline within 30 to 60 min (Gajdosik et al, 2007;Mizuno et al, 2013;Weppler and Magnusson, 2010). Since a meta-analysis review showed that there was no significant difference in ROM increase between foam rolling and stretching (Wilke et al, 2020), it was suggested that the prolonged effect of increasing ROM in foam rolling intervention was less than the effect of static stretching. Future studies are needed to clarify the mechanism of this difference between foam rolling and static stretching.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Moreover, a recent metaanalysis by Wiewelhove et al (2019) showed that foam rolling intervention resulted in a small improvement in sprint performance (+ 0.7%, effect size = 0.28) and flexibility (+ 4.0%, effect size = 0.34), whereas the effect on jump (-1.9%, effect size = 0.09) and strength performance (+ 1.8%, effect size = 0.12) was negligible. Furthermore, Wilke et al (2020) in their meta-analysis showed that foam rolling intervention had a large magnitude in ROM but was not superior to stretching intervention. Interestingly, Morales-Artacho et al (2017) investigated the effect of foam rolling on hamstring muscle stiffness by measured shear wave elastography (SWE), and showed a decrease in muscle stiffness after foam rolling intervention.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Acute and Prolonged Effects of Different Durations of Foam Rolling on Range of Motion, Muscle Stiffness, and Muscle Strength

Nakamura¹,

Onuma²,

Kiyono³

et al. 2021

jsportscimed

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“Foam Rolling” has been used in sports settings to increase range of motion and decrease muscle stiffness without decreasing muscle strength and athletic performance. However, there has been no study investigating the acute and prolonged effect of different durations of foam rolling intervention on muscle stiffness, and the minimum foam rolling intervention duration required to decrease muscle stiffness is unclear. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to investigate the acute and prolonged effect of different durations of foam rolling intervention on ROM, muscle stiffness, and muscle strength. The 45 participants were randomly allocated to 1 of 3 groups (30 s × 1 times group vs 30 s × 3 times group vs 30 s× 10 times group). The outcome measures were dorsiflexion range of motion, shear elastic modulus of medial gastrocnemius, and muscle strength before, 2 min and 30 min after foam rolling intervention. There were no significant differences before and 2 min after foam rolling intervention in 30 s×1 time group, whereas dorsiflexion range of motion was increased in both 30 s×3 times group (p = 0.042, d = 0.26) and 30 s× 10 times group (p < 0.01, d = 0.33). However, the increase in dorsiflexion range of motion was returned to baseline value after 30 minutes in both 30 s × 3 times group and 30 s × 10 times group. In addition, there were no significant changes in shear elastic modulus and muscle strength in all groups. This study suggested that foam rolling for more than 90 s or more of foam rolling was effective in order to increase the range of motion immediately without changing muscle stiffness and muscle strength.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Acute and Prolonged Effects of Different Durations of Foam Rolling on Range of Motion, Muscle Stiffness, and Muscle Strength

Nakamura¹,

Onuma²,

Kiyono³

et al. 2021

jsportscimed

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The following potential moderators of the treatment effect were dichotomized (for details refer to tables): program duration (weeks), session duration (mins), total program volume (mins), rest interval duration (seconds), age (years) and sex (female and male). The choice of the tested moderators was based on three criteria 17 . Firstly, they had to be clearly reported in at least five studies.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Chronic effects of high-intensity functional training on motor function: a systematic review with multilevel meta-analysis

Wilke

Mohr

2020

Sci Rep

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

High-intensity functional training (HIFT) has become a popular method in the sports and fitness sector. In contrast to unimodal approaches such as strength or endurance training, it has been hypothesized to induce concurrent adaptations in multiple markers of motor function. However, to date, the effectiveness of HIFT in this regard has not been studied. The present systematic review quantified the chronic effects of HIFT on motor function in healthy individuals. A multilevel meta-analysis with a robust random effects meta-regession model was used to pool the standardized mean differences (SMD) between (a) HIFT and (b) no-exercise (NEX) as well as conventional endurance, resistance and balance training for outcomes of muscle strength, endurance capacity and balance. The influence of possible effect modifiers such as program duration, session duration, age or sex was examined in a moderator analysis. Seventeen papers with moderate to high methodological quality (PEDro scale) were identified. Compared to NEX, HIFT had small to moderate positive effects on endurance capacity (SMD: 0.42, 95% CI 0.07–0.78, p = 0.03) and strength (0.60, 95% CI 0.02–1.18, p = 0.04) but no effect on balance (SMD: − 0.10, 95% CI − 1.13 to 0.92, p = 0.42). Regarding endurance, HIFT showed similar effectiveness as moderate-intensity endurance training (SMD: − 0.11, 95% CI − 1.17 to 0.95, p = 0.75) and high-intensity interval endurance training (SMD: − 0.15, 95% CI − 1.4 to 1.1, p = 0.66). No comparisons of HIFT vs. classical resistance or balance training were found. Moderator analyses revealed no influence of most effect modifiers. However, regarding endurance, females seemed to respond more strongly to HIFT in the comparison to NEX (p < .05). HIFT appears to represent an appropriate method to induce chronic improvements in motor function. While being superior to NEX and non-inferior to endurance training, current evidence does not allow a comparison against resistance and balance training. The impact of possible effect moderators should be further elucidated in future research.

show abstract

“…It is now widely acknowledged that exercise benefits from the conceptualization of habits (Hagger, 2019(Hagger, , 2020Gardner et al, 2020;Phillips, 2020). Regarding performance, the type of exercise (e.g., aerobic, resistance, high-intensity interval training, stretching) should be considered according to the performance outputs expected (Wen et al, 2019;Lee and Stone, 2020;Martland et al, 2020;Wilke et al, 2020).…”

Section: Exercisementioning

confidence: 99%

Performance Habits: A Framework Proposal

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Acute Effects of Foam Rolling on Range of Motion in Healthy Adults: A Systematic Review with Multilevel Meta-analysis

Cited by 109 publications

References 62 publications

The Acute and Prolonged Effects of Different Durations of Foam Rolling on Range of Motion, Muscle Stiffness, and Muscle Strength

The Acute and Prolonged Effects of Different Durations of Foam Rolling on Range of Motion, Muscle Stiffness, and Muscle Strength

Chronic effects of high-intensity functional training on motor function: a systematic review with multilevel meta-analysis

Performance Habits: A Framework Proposal

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About