Foam Rolling as a Recovery Tool Following Eccentric Exercise: Potential Mechanisms Underpinning Changes in Jump Performance
Article
Article Title | Foam Rolling as a Recovery Tool Following Eccentric Exercise: Potential Mechanisms Underpinning Changes in Jump Performance |
---|---|
ERA Journal ID | 200523 |
Article Category | Article |
Authors | Drinkwater, Eric J. (Author), Latella, Christopher (Author), Wilsmore, Christopher (Author), Bird, Stephen P. (Author) and Skein, Melissa (Author) |
Journal Title | Frontiers in Physiology |
Journal Citation | 10, pp. 1-10 |
Article Number | 768 |
Number of Pages | 10 |
Year | 2019 |
Place of Publication | Switzerland |
ISSN | 1664-042X |
Digital Object Identifier (DOI) | https://doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2019.00768 |
Web Address (URL) | https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fphys.2019.00768 |
Abstract | Purpose: Recovery from exercise-induced muscle damage (EIMD) is paramount in sports performance. Foam rolling (FR) has been suggested to improve acute performance, however, the ability to facilitate recovery from eccentric (ECC) exercise remains unclear. Methods: Eleven males undertook 6×25 ECC knee extensions to induce muscular damage. Immediately, 24, 48 and 72 h post-training countermovement jump (CMJ), maximal voluntary isometric contraction (MVIC), pressure-pain threshold (PPT), knee flexion range of motion (ROM) and mid-thigh circumference (MTC) were assessed. Neurophysiological measures included voluntary activation (VA), peak twitch torque (PTT), time to peak twitch (PTTtime) and rate of twitch torque development (RTD). Participants then spent 15 min FR prior to each time point, or control (CON). Repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) and standardised effect sizes (Hedges’ g) ± 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) were used to compare FR and CON. Results: CMJ was greater for FR compared to CON (P=0.030) at 72 h (8.6%, P=0.004) with moderate effects observed at 48 and 72 h (g=0.54-0.66). PPT was greater with FR (P=0.018) at 48 h only (23.7%, p=0.013), with moderate to large effects noted at all-time points (g=0.55-0.98). No significant differences were reported for MVIC (P=0.777, -5.1 to 4.2%), ROM (P=0.432, 1.6% to 3.5%), VA (P=0.050, 3.6 to 26.2%), PTT (P=0.302, -3.9 to 9.9%), PTTtime (P=0.702, -24.4 to 23.5%), RTD (P=0.864, -16.0 to -1.0%) or MTC (P=0.409, -0.5 to -0.1%) between conditions. Conclusions: FR appears to improve jump performance in the later stages of recovery following ECC exercise. This may be in part due to improved pain tolerance, however, mechanical and neurophysiological are not modulated with FR. |
Keywords | Foam rolling; Recovery |
Contains Sensitive Content | Does not contain sensitive content |
ANZSRC Field of Research 2020 | 420702. Exercise physiology |
420799. Sports science and exercise not elsewhere classified | |
Byline Affiliations | Deakin University |
Edith Cowan University | |
Charles Sturt University | |
University of Wollongong | |
Institution of Origin | University of Southern Queensland |
https://research.usq.edu.au/item/q5x69/foam-rolling-as-a-recovery-tool-following-eccentric-exercise-potential-mechanisms-underpinning-changes-in-jump-performance
Download files
Published Version
Drinkwater et al. 2019 F Physiol 10(768).pdf | ||
License: CC BY 4.0 | ||
File access level: Anyone |
136
total views68
total downloads5
views this month1
downloads this month