Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33638016›Full record

Trial reportEuropean journal of applied physiology2021

A comparison of foam rolling and vibration foam rolling on the quadriceps muscle function and mechanical properties.

Marina Maren Reiner, Christoph Glashüttner, Daniel Bernsteiner, Markus Tilp, Gael Guilhem, Antonio Morales-Artacho, Andreas Konrad

Open access · hybridAbstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in European journal of applied physiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
41citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
9.1field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

41 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 63 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Marina Maren ReinerInstitute of Human Movement Science, Sport and Health, University of Graz, Mozartgasse 14, 8010, Graz, Austria.
Christoph GlashüttnerInstitute of Human Movement Science, Sport and Health, University of Graz, Mozartgasse 14, 8010, Graz, Austria.
Daniel BernsteinerInstitute of Human Movement Science, Sport and Health, University of Graz, Mozartgasse 14, 8010, Graz, Austria.
Markus TilpInstitute of Human Movement Science, Sport and Health, University of Graz, Mozartgasse 14, 8010, Graz, Austria.
Gael GuilhemFrench Institute of Sport (INSEP), Laboratory Sport, Expertise and Performance (EA 7370), Paris, France.
Antonio Morales-ArtachoFrench Institute of Sport (INSEP), Laboratory Sport, Expertise and Performance (EA 7370), Paris, France.
Andreas KonradInstitute of Human Movement Science, Sport and Health, University of Graz, Mozartgasse 14, 8010, Graz, Austria. andreas.konrad@uni-graz.at.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5588-1824
University of Graz · ATInstitut National du Sport, de l'Expertise et de la Performance · FR

Funding

Austrian Science Fund (FWF) P 32078-B
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe purpose of the study was to investigate the effects of using a vibration foam roll (VFR) or a non-vibration foam roll (NVFR) on maximum voluntary isometric contraction peak torque (MVIC), range of motion (ROM), passive resistive torque (PRT), and shear modulus.

methodsTwenty-one male volunteers visited the laboratory on two separate days and were randomly assigned to either a VFR group or a NVFR group. Both interventions were performed for 3 × 1 min each. Before and after each intervention, passive resistive torque and maximum voluntary isometric contraction peak torque of the leg extensors were assessed with a dynamometer. Hip extension ROM was assessed using a modified Thomas test with 3D-motion caption. Muscle shear modulus of the vastus lateralis (VL), vastus medialis (VM), and rectus femoris (RF) was assessed with shear wave elastography (SWE).

resultsIn both groups (VFR, NVFR) we observed an increase in MVIC peak torque (+ 14.2 Nm, + 8.6 Nm) and a decrease in shear modulus of the RF (- 7.2 kPa, - 4.7 kPa). However, an increase in hip extension ROM (3.3°) was only observed in the VFR group. There was no change in PRT and shear modulus of the VL and VM, in both the VFR group and the NVFR group. Our findings demonstrate a muscle-specific acute decrease in passive RF stiffness after VFR and NVFR, with an effect on joint flexibility found only after VFR.

conclusionThe findings of this study suggest that VFR might be a more efficient approach to maximize performance in sports with flexibility demands.

Indexed as

VibrationAdultBiomechanical PhenomenaElasticity Imaging TechniquesElastic ModulusHealthy VolunteersHumansImaging, Three-DimensionalIsometric ContractionMaleMuscle Stretching ExercisesQuadriceps MuscleRange of Motion, ArticularTorqueFoam rollingMuscle stiffnessSelf-myofascial releaseShear wave elastographyVibration foam rolling

Identifiers

PMID33638016
PMCPMC8064982
OpenAlexW3129982806

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.