Institute for Exercise, Sport and Health, Leuphana University, Lüneburg, Germany.
School of Human Kinetics and Recreation, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's, Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada.
J Sports Sci Med. 2023 Jun 1;22(2):180-188. doi: 10.52082/jssm.2023.180. eCollection 2023 Jun.
Over the last decade, acute increases in range of motion (ROM) in response to foam rolling (FR) have been frequently reported. Compared to stretching, FR-induced ROM increases were not typically accompanied by a performance (e.g., force, power, endurance) deficit. Consequently, the inclusion of FR in warm-up routines was frequently recommended, especially since literature pointed out non-local ROM increases after FR. However, to attribute ROM increases to FR it must be ensured that such adaptations do not occur as a result of simple warm-up effects, as significant increases in ROM can also be assumed as a result of active warm-up routines. To answer this research question, 20 participants were recruited using a cross-over design. They performed 4x45 seconds hamstrings rolling under two conditions; FR, and sham rolling (SR) using a roller board to imitate the foam rolling movement without the pressure of the foam rolling. They were also tested in a control condition. Effects on ROM were tested under passive, active dynamic as well as ballistic conditions. Moreover, to examine non-local effects the knee to wall test (KtW) was used. Results showed that both interventions provided significant, moderate to large magnitude increases in passive hamstrings ROM and KtW respectively, compared to the control condition (p = 0.007-0.041, d = 0.62-0.77 and p = 0.002-0.006, d = 0.79-0.88, respectively). However, the ROM increases were not significantly different between the FR and the SR condition (p = 0.801, d = 0.156 and p = 0.933, d = 0.09, respectively). No significant changes could be obtained under the active dynamic (p = 0.65) while there was a significant decrease in the ballistic testing condition with a time effect (p < 0.001). Thus, it can be assumed that potential acute increases in ROM cannot be exclusively attributed to FR. It is therefore speculated that warm up effects could be responsible independent of FR or imitating the rolling movement, which indicates there is no additive effect of FR or SR to the dynamic or ballistic range of motion.
在过去的十年中,经常有报道称,泡沫轴滚动(FR)会导致运动范围(ROM)急性增加。与拉伸相比,FR 引起的 ROM 增加通常不会伴随着性能(例如力量、功率、耐力)下降。因此,FR 经常被推荐用于热身程序中,特别是因为文献指出 FR 后会出现非局部 ROM 增加。然而,要将 ROM 的增加归因于 FR,必须确保这种适应不是由于简单的热身效果引起的,因为主动热身程序也可以假设 ROM 会有显著增加。为了回答这个研究问题,采用交叉设计招募了 20 名参与者。他们在两种条件下进行了 4x45 秒的腘绳肌 FR 和假 FR(使用滚轴板模仿 FR 运动而不施加 FR 压力)。他们还在对照条件下进行了测试。在被动、主动动态和弹道条件下测试 ROM 的影响。此外,为了检查非局部效应,使用了膝关节到墙测试(KtW)。结果表明,与对照条件相比,两种干预措施均显著增加了被动腘绳肌 ROM 和 KtW,具有中等至较大幅度,分别为(p = 0.007-0.041,d = 0.62-0.77 和 p = 0.002-0.006,d = 0.79-0.88,分别)。然而,FR 和 SR 条件之间的 ROM 增加没有显著差异(p = 0.801,d = 0.156 和 p = 0.933,d = 0.09,分别)。在主动动态条件下没有得到显著变化(p = 0.65),而在弹道测试条件下有显著的时间效应下降(p <0.001)。因此,可以假设潜在的急性 ROM 增加不能完全归因于 FR。因此推测,热身效果可能是独立于 FR 或模仿滚动运动的原因,这表明 FR 或 SR 对动态或弹道运动范围没有附加效应。