Debski P1, Gnat R2, Białas E1
1University of Physical Education, Katowice, Poland, 2Faculty of Physiotherapy, University of Physical Education, Katowice, Poland
Background: Self-myofascial release by foam roller (SMR-FR) is the well-known and popular therapy. Growing enthusiasm is based on its high effectiveness and availability. The main objective of implementing the SMR-FR into the therapeutic intervention or athletic training is to improve the range of motion and to reduce the post-training muscular pain. There is lack of agreement which parameters should be used to optimize effects of such therapy.
Purpose: The purpose of this review is to critically select and assess current literature and answer the question: Which values of the following parameters:
(1) duration of the therapy,
(2) amount of the applied pressure,
(3) speed and
(4) frequency of the roll,
(5) type of the roller used,
(6) number of repetitions during one therapeutic session and
(7) interval between these repetitions exert the greatest effect on the tissue?
Methods: Authors started their literature search in May 2017.They included Ebscohost and PubMED databases. The following inclusion criteria were established:
- english language, high quality manuscripts (as evaluated by the PEDro scale)
- foam-rolling compared to the control group or to alternative therapy
- described basic parameters of therapy (at least 4 of the 7 mentioned above)
Results: The most desirable therapeutic results are obtained with use of a firmer type of roller, with highest possible amount of the pressure (as tolerated by the patient) during the period of 60-120 seconds (time of one application). The frequency of a single rolling movement should be moderate, and the movement should last about 3 seconds. Addressing the particularly sensitive area is recommended. During the course of a single session 1 to 3 applications, should be used separated by the 30-90 second breaks. If deeper therapeutic penetration of the tissue is needed, a firmer version of the roller is recommended.
Conclusion(s): Currently, there is no consensus on the optimal SMR-FR therapeutic programme, however there is a tendency to use SMR-FR tools in more standardized and physiologically-based way to enhance their efficiency. Using the treatment parameter values described above does not guarantee the therapeutic success, yet may be sufficient to obtain satisfactory results. In the future it will be necessary to specify what mechanisms are responsible for effects obtained during application of myofascial release tools in order make it easier to create a more precise treatment programme.
Implications: The described parameters of SMR-FR could help all therapists teaching their patients how to use self-therapy at home. This information could be also very useful for sport therapists trying manage bigger groups of athletes at the same time.
Keywords: Self-myofascial release, autotherapy, foam rolling
Funding acknowledgements: All expenses were covered by the Faculty of Physiotherapy, University of Physical Education, Katowice, Poland.
Purpose: The purpose of this review is to critically select and assess current literature and answer the question: Which values of the following parameters:
(1) duration of the therapy,
(2) amount of the applied pressure,
(3) speed and
(4) frequency of the roll,
(5) type of the roller used,
(6) number of repetitions during one therapeutic session and
(7) interval between these repetitions exert the greatest effect on the tissue?
Methods: Authors started their literature search in May 2017.They included Ebscohost and PubMED databases. The following inclusion criteria were established:
- english language, high quality manuscripts (as evaluated by the PEDro scale)
- foam-rolling compared to the control group or to alternative therapy
- described basic parameters of therapy (at least 4 of the 7 mentioned above)
Results: The most desirable therapeutic results are obtained with use of a firmer type of roller, with highest possible amount of the pressure (as tolerated by the patient) during the period of 60-120 seconds (time of one application). The frequency of a single rolling movement should be moderate, and the movement should last about 3 seconds. Addressing the particularly sensitive area is recommended. During the course of a single session 1 to 3 applications, should be used separated by the 30-90 second breaks. If deeper therapeutic penetration of the tissue is needed, a firmer version of the roller is recommended.
Conclusion(s): Currently, there is no consensus on the optimal SMR-FR therapeutic programme, however there is a tendency to use SMR-FR tools in more standardized and physiologically-based way to enhance their efficiency. Using the treatment parameter values described above does not guarantee the therapeutic success, yet may be sufficient to obtain satisfactory results. In the future it will be necessary to specify what mechanisms are responsible for effects obtained during application of myofascial release tools in order make it easier to create a more precise treatment programme.
Implications: The described parameters of SMR-FR could help all therapists teaching their patients how to use self-therapy at home. This information could be also very useful for sport therapists trying manage bigger groups of athletes at the same time.
Keywords: Self-myofascial release, autotherapy, foam rolling
Funding acknowledgements: All expenses were covered by the Faculty of Physiotherapy, University of Physical Education, Katowice, Poland.
Topic: Sport & sports injuries; Musculoskeletal; Pain & pain management
Ethics approval required: No
Institution: University of Physical Education, Katowice, Poland
Ethics committee: Faculty of Physiotherapy, University of Physical Education, Katowice, Poland.
Reason not required: No ethical approval was obtained. In case of systematic reviews ethical approval is only necessary in exceptional circumstances which did not occur in frames of the presented study.
All authors, affiliations and abstracts have been published as submitted.
