Summary:
The existing evidence with regards to the benefits of vibration foam rolling (VFR)
converge to an increase in joint range of motion (ROM), however they remain conflicting
on the respective benefits in fitness related parameters. The purpose of this study was to
examine the acute effect of rolling with VFR as compared to the effect of dynamic
stretching (DS) on the ankle ROM, postural performance and lower limb explosive
performance in physically active adult subjects. A secondary purpose was to investigate
the possible interference of the surface of support in the acute effect of the aforementioned interventions on postural performance. Ten middle-aged physically active women (age: 47.6±9.9 years, mass: 58.9±6.5 kg, height: 161.9±5.0 cm) participated in a randomized and counterbalance order in an experimental protocol consisting of: a) MFR technique with VFR at 30Hz (massage on knee extensors-flexors and ankle plantarflexors, 3 series of 45sec each with 25sec rest between series and 15sec between muscle groups per lower limb, total duration 22-23 min), b) dynamic stretching (DS) exercises (hip and knee hip extensors-flexors and ankle plantarflexors, 3 series of 30sec each with 15sec rest between series and 25sec between exercises, total duration 13-14 min). Before (PRE) and after (at 10min of the recovery phase, (POST10’)) each intervention, there were measurements of: a) ankle ROM with the weight bearing lunge test (WBLT) bilaterally for both limbs, b) postural performance, as assessed during one- and two-legged quiet stance trials with open eyes on a firm and foam surface (0,49 x 0,49 x 0,1m), c) explosive performance of the lower limbs during CMJ trials. In order to determine the postural and explosive performance, the vertical ground reaction force was recorded by means of a customized forceplate (Fs = 1000 Hz) in order to calculate CoP parameters and muscle force and power of the lower limbs as derived from the jump’s impulse phase. Statistics included a 3-factor RM ANOVA (intervention x measure x support surface) to test for possible differences in postural performance and a 2-factor RM ANOVA (intervention x measure) for possible differences in ankle ROM separately per lower limb and explosive performance respectively (a=0.05). Results showed a significant (p<0.001) increase in left (6.3%) and right (7.5%) ankle ROM regardless of intervention, while there was no significant (p>0.05) intervention x measure interaction. There was no significant (p>0.05) intervention x measure x support surface interaction on any CoP examined parameter either in one- or two-legged static stance. A significant (p<0.001) increase in CoP parameters was found while standing on the foam as compared with standing on the firm surface in the one-legged (+7% - 35%) as well as in two-legged (+81% - 159%) trials. Explosive performance (jump height, maximal force, power and impulse) was not significantly (p>0.05) changed due to interventions between PRE and POST10’ measure. In agreement with previous studies, the increased ankle ROM was probably related with a higher tolerance to stretch, while the absence of differences in postural and lower limb explosive performance could be interpreted as an insufficient stimulusdue to the subjects’ high levels of physical activity. In conclusion, the vibration foam rolling technique as well as dynamic stretching were not able to elicit acute changes in fitness related parameters in middle-aged physically active women. Further research is warranted to examine the possible long-term effects of these interventions. Key words: myofascial, myofascial release (MFR), vibration foam rolling, ankle range of motion, postural stability, explosive performance
Keywords:
myofascial, myofascial release (MFR), vibration foam rolling, ankle range of motion, postural stability, explosive performance
