Literature DB >> 28095747

Effects of roller massager on muscle recovery after exercise-induced muscle damage.

Nuno Casanova1, Joana F Reis1,2, João R Vaz1,2,3, Rita Machado1, Bruno Mendes3, Duane C Button4, Pedro Pezarat-Correia1, Sandro R Freitas1,3.   

Abstract

Two experiments (n = 10) were conducted to determine the effects of roller massager (RM) on ankle plantar flexor muscle recovery after exercise-induced muscle damage (EIMD). Experiment 1 examined both functional [i.e., ankle plantar flexion maximal isometric contraction and submaximal (30%) sustained force; ankle dorsiflexion maximal range of motion and resistance to stretch; and medial gastrocnemius pain pressure threshold] and morphological [cross-sectional area, thickness, fascicle length, and fascicle angle] variables, before and immediately, 1, 24, 48, and 72 h after an EIMD stimulus. Experiment 2 examined medial gastrocnemius deoxyhaemoglobin concentration kinetics before and 48 h after EIMD. Participants performed both experiments twice: with (RM) and without (no-roller massager; NRM) the application of a RM (6 × 45 s; 20-s rest between sets). RM intervention did not alter the functional impairment after EIMD, as well as the medial gastrocnemius morphology and oxygenation kinetics (P > 0.05). Although, an acute increase of ipsilateral (RM = + 19%, NRM = -5%, P = 0.032) and a strong tendency for contralateral (P = 0.095) medial gastrocnemius pain pressure threshold were observed. The present results suggest that a RM has no effect on plantar flexors performance, morphology, and oxygenation recovery after EIMD, except for muscle pain pressure threshold (i.e., a soreness).

Entities:  

Keywords:  Delayed onset muscle soreness increase; muscle morphology; muscle oxygenation; pain pressure threshold; performance

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28095747     DOI: 10.1080/02640414.2017.1280609

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Sports Sci        ISSN: 0264-0414            Impact factor:   3.337


  7 in total

1.  The Addition of Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation with Roller Massage Alone or in Combination Did Not Increase Pain Tolerance or Range of Motion.

Authors:  James D Young; Alyssa-Joy Spence; Gerard Power; David G Behm
Journal:  J Sports Sci Med       Date:  2018-11-20       Impact factor: 2.988

2.  DURATION OF MYOFASCIAL ROLLING FOR OPTIMAL RECOVERY, RANGE OF MOTION, AND PERFORMANCE: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE.

Authors:  Garrett A Hughes; Leanne M Ramer
Journal:  Int J Sports Phys Ther       Date:  2019-12

3.  ROLLER MASSAGE: SURVEY OF PHYSICAL THERAPY PROFESSIONALS AND A COMMENTARY ON CLINICAL STANDARDS- PART II.

Authors:  Scott W Cheatham; Kyle R Stull; Tony Ambler-Wright
Journal:  Int J Sports Phys Ther       Date:  2018-08

4.  FOUR WEEKS OF ROLLER MASSAGE TRAINING DID NOT IMPACT RANGE OF MOTION, PAIN PRESSURE THRESHOLD, VOLUNTARY CONTRACTILE PROPERTIES OR JUMP PERFORMANCE.

Authors:  Daniel D Hodgson; Camila D Lima; Jonathan L Low; David G Behm
Journal:  Int J Sports Phys Ther       Date:  2018-08

5.  Effects of Foam Rolling Duration on Tissue Stiffness and Perfusion: A Randomized Cross-Over Trial.

Authors:  Jan Schroeder; Jan Wilke; Karsten Hollander
Journal:  J Sports Sci Med       Date:  2021-10-01       Impact factor: 2.988

6.  Cross transfer acute effects of foam rolling with vibration on ankle dorsiflexion range of motion.

Authors:  María Teresa García-Gutiérrez; Paloma Guillén-Rogel; Darryl J Cochrane; Pedro J Marín
Journal:  J Musculoskelet Neuronal Interact       Date:  2018-06-01       Impact factor: 2.041

7.  The effects of one session of roller massage on recovery from exercise-induced muscle damage: A randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Flávia V A Medeiros; Martim Bottaro; Wagner R Martins; Deise L F Ribeiro; Emmanuela B A Marinho; Ricardo B Viana; João B Ferreira-Junior; Jake C Carmo
Journal:  J Exerc Sci Fit       Date:  2020-05-19       Impact factor: 3.103

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.