Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33707988›Full record

Trial reportJournal of sports science & medicine2021

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

Masatoshi Nakamura, Remi Onuma, Ryosuke Kiyono, Koki Yasaka, Shigeru Sato, Kaoru Yahata, Taizan Fukaya, Andreas Konrad

Open access · bronzeAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of sports science & medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 50 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
50citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
11.5field-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

50 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 77 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  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. Article
  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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Masatoshi NakamuraInstitute for Human Movement and Medical Sciences, Niigata University of Health and Welfare, Niigata, Japan.
Remi OnumaDepartment of Physical Therapy, Niigata University of Health and Welfare, Niigata, Japan.
Ryosuke KiyonoInstitute for Human Movement and Medical Sciences, Niigata University of Health and Welfare, Niigata, Japan.
Koki YasakaDepartment of Physical Therapy, Niigata University of Health and Welfare, Niigata, Japan.
Shigeru SatoInstitute for Human Movement and Medical Sciences, Niigata University of Health and Welfare, Niigata, Japan.
Kaoru YahataInstitute for Human Movement and Medical Sciences, Niigata University of Health and Welfare, Niigata, Japan.
Taizan FukayaInstitute for Human Movement and Medical Sciences, Niigata University of Health and Welfare, Niigata, Japan.
Andreas KonradInstitute of Human Movement Science, Sport and Health, University of Graz, Mozartgasse 14, 8010 Graz, Austria.
Niigata University of Health and Welfare · JPUniversity of Graz · AT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

"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.

Indexed as

Elastic ModulusFemaleHumansMaleMassageMuscle, SkeletalMuscle StrengthMuscle TonusRange of Motion, ArticularTime FactorsYoung Adultdorsiflexiongastrocnemius muscleisometric muscle strengthShear elastic modulus

Identifiers

PMID33707988
PMCPMC7919347
OpenAlexW3135000332

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.