Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33946640›Full record

ArticleSports (Basel, Switzerland)2021

Total Training Volume and Muscle Soreness Parameters Performing Agonist or Antagonist Foam Rolling between Sets.

Haroldo Gualter Santana, Bruno Lara, Filipe Canuto Almeida da Silva, Pedro Medina Eiras, Gabriel Andrade Paz, Jeffrey M Willardson, Humberto Miranda

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Sports (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 31% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. 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.

Haroldo Gualter SantanaLADTEF-Performance, Training, and Physical Exercise Laboratory, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro 21941-599, Brazil.
Bruno LaraLato Sensu Postgraduate Program in Strength Training, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro 21941-599, Brazil.
Filipe Canuto Almeida da SilvaLato Sensu Postgraduate Program in Strength Training, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro 21941-599, Brazil.
Pedro Medina EirasLato Sensu Postgraduate Program in Strength Training, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro 21941-599, Brazil.
Gabriel Andrade PazLADTEF-Performance, Training, and Physical Exercise Laboratory, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro 21941-599, Brazil.
Jeffrey M WillardsonHealth and Human Performance Department, Montana State University Billings, Billings, MT 59101, USA.
Humberto MirandaLADTEF-Performance, Training, and Physical Exercise Laboratory, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro 21941-599, Brazil.
Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro · BRMontana State University Billings · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFoam rolling (FR) has become very popular in recent years; however, the practice of FR between sets of resistance training (RT) for the lower limbs needs further examination. PURPOSE: Therefore, the purpose of the present study was to examine the effect of FR for the agonists (quadriceps) and antagonists (hamstrings) between multiple sets of the leg extension on repetition maximum performance (RM), fatigue resistance index (FRI), and muscle soreness (MS). STUDY

designQuasi-experimental clinical trial.

methodsTwenty trained men participated in this study (30.35 ± 6.56 years, 1.77 ± 0.05 cm, 87.70 ± 7.6 kg) and attended seven sessions with 48 h between sessions, (one familiarization session; two 10-RM test and retest sessions; and four experimental sessions). The four experimental sessions were performed in random order and included: agonist foam rolling (AFR), antagonist foam rolling (ANTFR), agonist/antagonist foam rolling (A/ANTFR), and traditional control (TP, without foam rolling). All sessions consisted of three sets for maximal repetitions with a 10-RM load for the leg extension. In the AFR and ANTFR sessions, there was a 120 s rest interval between sets, during which FR was done for the agonists or antagonists, respectively. In the A/ANTFR protocol, there was a 120 s rest interval between sets, during which FR was done for the agonists and antagonists. In the traditional protocol (TP), there was a 120 s passive rest interval between sets.

resultsRegarding the total training volume (TTV), significant differences were noted between sessions (F

conclusionIn conclusion, foam rolling between sets for the agonist or antagonist separately or in succession, resulted in greater neuromuscular performance and higher fatigue indices, as well as reducing the perception of acute muscle soreness.

Indexed as

foam rollingresistance trainingself-myofascial release

Identifiers

PMID33946640
PMCPMC8145770
OpenAlexW3159392447

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.