Trial reportEuropean journal of applied physiology2022
Comparison between 6-week foam rolling intervention program with and without vibration on rolling and non-rolling sides.
Trial report in European journal of applied physiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
19 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Static Stretch Training versus Foam Rolling Training Effects on Range of Motion: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2024Pooled it
- The Effects of Foam Rolling Training on Performance Parameters: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis including Controlled and Randomized Controlled Trials.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Pooled it
- A Single Bout of Foam Rolling After Nordic Hamstring Exercise Improves Flexibility but Has No Effect on Muscle Stiffness or Functional Muscle Parameters.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Trial
- A 1-Week Comprehensive Foam Rolling Intervention Program Can Improve Knee Pain but Not Muscle Function and Range of Motion in Patients with Total Knee Arthroplasty.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Trial
- Comparison of The Effect of High- and Low-Frequency Vibration Foam Rolling on The Quadriceps Muscle.Journal of sports science & medicine · 2022Trial
- Effects of a 3-week foam rolling warm-up intervention on ankle dorsiflexion measurements and jumping performance in young rhythmic gymnasts.BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation · 2026Article
- Effects of foam rolling and the knowledge-to-action gap: are practitioners' beliefs supported by the evidence? An international survey study.BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation · 2026Article
- Repeated static stretching was more effective for increasing range of motion and decreasing passive stiffness than a combination of a thermal agent with static stretching.Biology of sport · 2026Article
- A survey of sports and rehabilitation professionals on foam rolling applications, contraindications, and adverse events - does the science reach professionals' perceptions?Frontiers in physiology · 2025Article
- Discussing Conflicting Explanatory Approaches in Flexibility Training Under Consideration of Physiology: A Narrative Review.Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2024Review
- The Acute Effect of Percussive Massage Intervention with and without Heat Application on Plantar Flexor Muscles' Passive and Active Properties.Journal of sports science & medicine · 2024Article
- Comparison of acute and prolonged effects of short-term foam rolling and vibration foam rolling on the properties of knee extensors.Biology of sport · 2024Article
- Inter-Set Foam Rolling of the Latissimus Dorsi Acutely Increases Repetitions in Lat Pull-Down Exercise without Affecting RPE.Journal of functional morphology and kinesiology · 2024Article
- Article
- The acute effect of roller massager on knee joint range of motion and muscle pain in older adults with total knee arthroplasty.Journal of musculoskeletal & neuronal interactions · 2023Article
- The contralateral effects of foam rolling on range of motion and muscle performance.European journal of applied physiology · 2023Review
- Self-Myofascial Release of the Foot Plantar Surface: The Effects of a Single Exercise Session on the Posterior Muscular Chain Flexibility after One Hour.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
- The non-local effects of 7-week foot sole static stretching and foam rolling training on shoulder extension range of motion.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2023Article
- Comparison of the Prolonged Effects of Foam Rolling and Vibration Foam Rolling Interventions on Passive Properties of Knee Extensors.Journal of sports science & medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe chronic effects of unilateral foam rolling (FR) or FR with vibration (VFR) intervention on the rolling and non-rolling sides (cross-education effects) are still unclear. Thus, this study aimed to investigate the effects of unilateral 6-week FR or VFR intervention on ankle dorsiflexion range of motion (DF ROM), muscle stiffness, and muscle strength in both rolling and non-rolling sides.
methodsThirty healthy young men were randomly allocated into the FR (n = 15) or the VFR intervention group (n = 15). Participants performed three sets of unilateral FR or VFR interventions for 60 s of the calf muscles twice/week, for 6 weeks. DF ROM, gastrocnemius muscle stiffness, and maximal voluntary isometric contraction (MVIC) torque were assessed in the rolling and non-rolling sides before and after the intervention.
resultsThe DF ROM increased significantly (p < 0.05) to the same extent in the FR and VFR intervention groups on both rolling (FR: d = 0.58, VFR: d = 0.63) and non-rolling (FR: d = 0.39, VFR: d = 0.50) sides. Similarly, the passive torque at DF ROM increased significantly (p < 0.05) to the same extent in the FR and VFR intervention groups on both rolling (FR: d = 0.85, VFR: d = 0.77) and non-rolling (FR: d = 0.76, VFR: d = 0.68) sides. However, there were no significant changes in muscle stiffness and MVIC after FR and VFR interventions on both the rolling and non-rolling sides. FR and VFR interventions could increase the ROM in both the rolling and non-rolling sides but could not change muscle stiffness and strength.
conclusionsThe results showed that it is not necessarily needed to perform VFR to increase ROM in the long term.
Indexed as
Identifiers
35704122What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.