ArticleBMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation2026
Comparison of tissue flossing and mobilization with movement effects on motion, vertical jump, gait, and balance.
Article in BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06392880 (Comparison of the Effects of Floss Taping and Mulligan Mobilization on Ankle Joint Movement, Vertical Jump, Gait and Balance in Healthy Young Adults), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
Comparison of the Effects of Floss Taping and Mulligan Mobilization on Ankle Joint Movement, Vertical Jump, Gait and Balance in Healthy Young Adults
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTissue flossing and mobilization with movement (MWM) have been used to improve ankle dorsiflexion range of motion (ROM), vertical jump, gait, and balance in athletes after sports injuries or to increase sports performance. However, direct comparisons between tissue flossing and MWM in recreationally active, healthy young adults remain limited. This study aimed to compare the effects of tissue flossing and MWM on ankle ROM, jump, gait, and balance in recreationally active young adults. The secondary aim was to compare the perceived comfort level between interventions.
methodsThis crossover randomized controlled study included three groups: Flossing, MWM, and control. The interventions were administered with a one-week interval between sessions. The tissue flossing and the MWM were applied to both ankles. No intervention was performed in the control group. All measurements were conducted both before and after the interventions. Passive and active ankle dorsiflexion ROM was evaluated using ImageJ software and the Weight-Bearing Lunge Test, respectively. The BTS G-Walk IMU sensor was used for counter-movement jump, gait, and balance assessments.
resultsTwo-way repeated-measures ANOVA revealed significant group × time interaction effects for passive ankle dorsiflexion ROM and jump height (p < 0.05), with the MWM group showing greater improvements than the flossing and control groups. Active ankle dorsiflexion ROM also showed a significant interaction effect (p < 0.05), where both the MWM and flossing groups improved compared to the control group. Within-group comparisons showed no improvement in the control group (p > 0.05). The MWM group demonstrated significant gains in both active and passive dorsiflexion ROM and vertical jump height (p < 0.05), whereas the flossing group improved only in active dorsiflexion ROM (p < 0.05). The MWM was also perceived as more comfortable than flossing (p < 0.05).
conclusionsMWM demonstrated advantages in specific outcomes (passive ROM, jump height, comfort) compared to flossing in the acute setting.
trial registrationNCT06392880, 04/26/2024 (retrospectively registered), Link https//clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06392880.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.