Skip to main content
NCBI home page
European Journal of Sport Science logoLink to European Journal of Sport Science
. 2024 Jan 30;24(1):36–44. doi: 10.1002/ejsc.12059

The effects of a preconditioning vibration rolling warm‐up on multidirectional repeated sprinting‐induced muscle damage

Yi‐Chieh Chang 1, Wei‐Chin Tseng 2, Chih‐Hui Chiu 3, Tsung‐Yu Hsieh 4, Chien‐KM Chang 5, Xiang Dai 6, Che‐Hsiu Chen 6,✉
PMCID: PMC11235596

Abstract

The purpose of this investigation was to examine whether adding a set of vibrating foam rollers (VFR) to a regular running‐based warm‐up before a bout of multidirectional repeated sprints provides protective effects against the sprinting‐induced muscle damage. Twenty‐four elite college handball and rugby players participated in this study. After the familiarization visit, the subjects were randomly divided into either the vibration rolling (VFR) or the general warm‐up (GW) group. Before (pretest), post‐24, 48, and 72 h after the muscle‐damaging protocol (15 sets of 30‐m maximal multi directional repeated sprints), plasma creatine kinase (CK), muscle soreness, hip flexion passive range of motion (ROM), isometric strength, and hexagon agility was measured. After the VFR, the CK and DOMS were significantly less than GW (p < 0.05). In addition, when compared with the GW, the hamstring isometric strength, hexagon agility, and 0–10 m and 0–30‐m sprint performances showed faster recovery for the VFR (p < 0.05). The VFR protocol had protective effect on multidirectional repeated sprinting‐induced muscle damage markers than GW protocol. Therefore, preconditioning warm‐up activities using VFR can be integrated into a traditional sport‐specific warm‐up protocol for elite athletes before competitions/training may take advantage of this strategy to facilitate muscle recovery.

Keywords: fatigue, injury & prevention, recovery

Highlights

  • Multi directional maximal repeated shuttle sprint exercises result in muscle damage.

  • The VFR was applied on both the hamstrings and quadriceps prior to the sprints resulted in significantly less muscle damage and faster recovery than the GW condition.

  • VFR exhibited immediate protective effects, even for the highly trained athletes.

1. INTRODUCTION

High‐intensity multidirectional repeated sprints are usually performed in field sports such as soccer and rugby to stop or change direction (Duthie et al., 2003; Karcher & Buchheit, 2014; Small et al., 2010). Repeated straight‐line or intermittent shuttle sprint exercises result in muscle damage, with symptoms such as reduced muscle strength and range of motion (ROM), delayed‐onset muscle soreness (DOMS), decreased serum creatine kinase (CK) levels, and elevated myoglobin concentrations (Boukhris et al., 2020; Howatson & Milak, 2009; Keane et al., 2015; Thompson et al., 1999; Timmins et al., 2014). The study identified a significant decrease in knee extensor strength and increase in muscle soreness, CK, and limb girth following 15 × 30 m sprints in a 10‐m deceleration zone (Howatson & Milak, 2009). In addition, Boukhris et al. (2020) reported a significant increase in muscle damage and inflammation symptoms following a 5‐m shuttle run test (6 × 30 s). These findings indicate that multidirectional utility movements involve a heavy eccentric overload.

Warm‐up exercise prior to participation in sports is critical because it improves movement and prevents injury. Stretching is often a primary part of the warm‐up procedure to enhance muscle flexibility and performance and to prevent muscle damage (Chen, Chen, et al., 2018; Chen et al., 2021; Chen et al., 2011; Chen et al., 2013). Most studies have reported that compared with static stretching (SS), dynamic stretching (DS) more effectively enhances athletic performance (Behm et al., 2016; Opplert & Babault, 2018). However, not all DS procedures improve performance; for example, DS can lead to some impairments in concentric performance (60o/s) (Haddad et al., 2019), eccentric knee flexor movement, and conventional hamstring‐to‐quadriceps (H:Q) and functional H:Q ratios (60o/s and 180o/s, respectively) during isokinetic strength tests (Costa et al., 2014).

Foam rolling (FR) and vibrating foam rolling (VFR) have become popular techniques for warm‐up and recovery in sports and physical therapy. Studies have indicated that FR or VFR increased ROM, muscle strength, and sports performance (Lee et al., 2018; Lin et al., 2020) and that it exhibited a positive effect on ROM, soreness, and recovery from muscle‐damaging exercises (de Benito et al., 2019; Hsu et al., 2020; Romero‐Moraleda et al., 2019) suggested that a combination of DS with FR or VFR (2 sets of 30 s; 33 Hz) as warm‐up exercises significantly improved flexibility, power, ball speed, and agility. DS followed by VFR not only improved knee extension ROM, agility, and countermovement jump performance but also reduced quadriceps muscle stiffness, thus reducing the risk of injury (Lin et al., 2020). Another study reported that compared with nonvibrating foam rolling, the VFR (3 sets of 60 s; 32 Hz) exhibited increased leg extensor strength, decreased rectus femoris muscle stiffness, and increased hip extension ROM (Reiner et al., 2021).

However, a meta‐analysis demonstrated that acute whole‐body vibration (WBV; 30–60 Hz) can be used as a pre‐exercise intervention to alleviate the muscle damage symptoms caused by eccentric exercises (Tan et al., 2020). Research by (Magoffin et al., 2020) used WBV (5 sets of 60 s; 40 Hz) as a warm‐up strategy before eccentric contractions of the knee extensors in order to attenuate DOMS. Kim et al. (2017) reported that applying a vibrator stimulus (60 Hz for 5 min) to the middle of the biceps muscle before eccentric exercise resulted in low lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) and CK levels and a high pressure‐pain threshold (PPT) (Kim et al., 2017). Another study demonstrated that massage (15 min) or vibration treatment (50 Hz for 5 min) applied to the biceps brachii prior to an eccentric exercise could prevent muscle damage symptoms (Imtiyaz et al., 2014).

Although researchers have investigated how WBV (frequency: 30–60 Hz) alleviate the muscle damage symptoms interventions from exercise‐induced muscle damage, information about the effects of VFR interventions on muscle damage markers when applied before intensive exercise is still limited. Accordingly, the present study examined the effects of a VFR intervention applied to the quadriceps and hamstring before a high‐intensity multidirectional repeated sprinting exercise on the responses of indirect muscle damage markers.

2. MATERIALS AND METHODS

2.1. Experimental approach to the problem

This study explored the effects of using VFR as a warm‐up to attenuate muscle damage after a multidirectional repeated sprinting exercise. Subjects were randomly assigned to either the VFR group or the GW group and performed multidirectional repeated sprinting. The independent variable was VFR or GW, and dependent variables included plasma CK, muscle soreness, ROM, isometric strength, and agility.

2.2. Subject

The present study involved 24 male college handball and rugby players (mean ± SD, age = 20.21 ± 1.15 years; height = 175.92 ± 5.57 cm; and body mass = 76.25 ± 9.13 kg) voluntarily participated in this investigation. On average, they trained 5 times a week with 3–4 h (including resting periods) spent on each training.

Before any experimental testing, each subject completed an informed consent. During the entire investigation, all subjects were refrained from vigorous physical activities and training at least 5 days before any experimental visits. On all the experimental visit days, they were not allowed to consume any food or supplements that contain alcohol and caffeine. Extra effort was made to conduct testing at roughly the same time of the day. All the experimental procedures in this investigation were in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the Institutional Review Board (No.: IRB‐108‐61).

2.3. Procedures

Prior to the experimental stage, all participants attended an introductory session during which they were familiarized with the designated exercise intervention and testing. Before the multidirectional repeated sprints exercise, baseline (pretest) data were measured and VFR or a general warm‐up (GW) was performed. Measurements for the following variables were conducted 24, 48, and 72 h after the sprints: plasma CK levels, muscle soreness, hip flexion passive ROM, isometric strength, agility, 0–10 m and 0–30‐m sprint time. These measurements (e.g., muscle soreness, ROM, and isometric strength) were always performed on the participants' dominant side, determined by whether they kicked a soccer ball with their left or right foot.

Participants were randomly divided into either a VFR or GW group. Those in the VFR group performed 15 min of warm‐ups; 5 min of jogging (at 60%–100% of their perceived maximum speed), 2 min of SS, 2 min of DS, and 8 min of VFR. Those in the GW group performed 5 min of jogging, 2 min of SS, 2 min of DS, and then sat on the chair. The hamstring and quadriceps DS exercises for the two different methods of stretching were described in a previous study (Sekir et al., 2010).

After the warm‐up protocol, baseline measurements for the dependent variables were performed in the same order (plasma CK, muscle soreness, hip flexion ROM, isometric strength, and agility). Subsequently, the participants performed 15 × (5 + 5 + 5 m) maximal intermittent sprints with three directional changes. The rest interval between the consecutive sprint sets was 60 s. Dependent variables were measured again in the same order and manner 24, 48, and 72 h after the sprint exercise.

2.4. General warm‐up

The GW group comprised 5 min of jogging, 2 min of static stretching, 2 min of dynamic stretching and then rested for 8 min.

2.5. Vibration rolling warm‐up

The VFR group comprised 5 min of jogging, 2 min of static stretching, 2 min of dynamic stretching, and VFR for 8 min. A vibration of 48 Hz was applied using the (Hyperice, VYPER 2.0, Irvine, CA, USA). The VFR was conducted to perform 30 s at a rate of 30 rolls per minute using a metronome to keep pace. The subjects performed the VFR on the floor by actively rolling back and forth on the quadriceps and hamstring muscles. Rolling down the muscle and back was counted as 1 roll. The rolling was applied on both the hamstrings and quadriceps of both limbs; 4 sets in a randomized order for a total 8 min.

3. MEASUREMENTS FOR DEPENDENT VARIABLES

3.1. Plasma creatine kinase activity (CK)

Approximately 10 mL of venous blood was drawn using a standard venipuncture technique from the cubital fossa region of the arm and centrifuged for 10 min to extract plasma. Plasma samples were stored at −80oC until analysis. Plasma CK activity was measured by an automated clinical chemistry analyzer (Model Elecsys 2010, F. Hoffmann‐La Roche Ltd, Tokyo, Japan) using commercial test kits (Roche Diagnostics, Indianapolis, IN, USA).

3.2. Hip flexion passive range of motion (ROM)

The passive straight‐leg raises (PSLR) test was used to measure the dominant hip flexion passive ROM (Chen, Ye, Wang, Chen, & Tseng, 2018). The participants lay supine on a treatment table, and the positions of the waist and nondominant leg were fixed using a strap. The first tester moved the participants' dominant leg until it reached a position in which the participant felt mild pain in the hamstring muscle, at which time a handheld digital inclinometer (Model #A800, Jin‐Bomb, Kaohsiung, Taiwan) was placed over the distal tibia. The second tester read and recorded the measured PSLR ROM. The test was repeated 3 times, with 15 s of rest between tests. Averages were used for analysis.

3.3. Perception of muscle soreness

Muscle soreness was rated with a visual analog scale that consisted of a 100‐mm line, with 0 indicating no pain and 100 representing extreme pain.

The participants in a relaxed standing position were asked to assess the soreness level when the tester palpated over the hamstring muscle (midpoint of the distance from the ischial tuberosity to the knee joint fold, along the line of the bicep femoris) and quadriceps muscle (midpoint of the distance from the iliac crest to the superior border of the patella).

3.4. Hexagon agility test

A hexagon with 24‐inch sides and 120‐degree angles was marked with a tape on a hard‐surface floor. The participant standing in the middle of the hexagon marked the starting location. The tester gave the command ‘‘Ready, go’’ and started the stopwatch. On the ‘‘Go’’ command, each participant began double‐leg hopping from the center of the hexagon over each side and back to the center in a clockwise direction until the participant went around the hexagon 3 times and returned to the center (18 jumps). The stopwatch was stopped once the participant was back at the center mark after 3 revolutions around the hexagon. The participants were required forward throughout the test sequence, and if the feet could not land on the taped edges of the hexagon, the trial was stopped and restarted. The participants were instructed to perform the test as fast as they could. Three trials were made with 30 s rest in between and the fastest time was recorded for analysis (Beekhuizen et al., 2009).

3.5. Isometric hamstring muscle force

Isometric hamstring muscle force was tested with a microfet 2™ Digital Handheld dynamometer (Hoggan health, Draper, UT, USA). This test was performed on dominant legs at 30° of knee flexion. Participants were laid on a mat, the heel of the nondominant leg rested on the floor and knee straight, while the other heel of the dominant leg was set on the handheld dynamometer. The contraction was held for 3 s with verbal encouragement, and repeated three trials with 1 min of rest between the trials. The highest peak force (kg) was recorded for analysis (McCall et al., 2015).

3.6. Thirty‐m linear sprint test

The test was conducted with a Smartspeed Pro timing gate system (Fusion Sport, Boulder, CO). With the standing position, the participants sprinted 30 m when they heard the audio cue. Three trials were performed with 2 min of rest between each trial. The best value was selected. In addition, the split time for 0–10 m was also recorded for data analysis.

3.6.1. Statistical analyses

Data are presented as mean ± SD. After the Shapiro–Wilk test for normality, dependent variables were analyzed in a statistical software (IBM SPSS Statistics 25.0; IBM, Armonk, NY) using a 2‐way repeated ANOVA (2 experimental treatments, GW vs. VFR, and time series, pretest, post‐24, 48, and 72 h after sprint exercises) was used to test the muscle injury of VFR on outcomes of interest (CK, muscle soreness, hip flexion passive ROM, knee flexion isometric strength, agility, and 0–10 m and 0–30‐m sprint time). Estimates of effect size using the partial eta squared (η 2). The alpha level was set at 0.05. If applicable, all post hoc analyses were Bonferroni corrected.

4. RESULTS

Table 1 shows the mean values and SDs for plasma CK, muscle soreness, hip flexion passive ROM, and knee flexion isometric strength, agility, and 0–10 m and 0–30‐m sprint.

TABLE 1.

Mean ± SD before (pretest), 1 day (post‐24 h), 2 days (post‐48), and 3 days (post‐72 h) after the multidirectional repeated sprints for plasma CK, muscle soreness, hip flexion passive ROM, and knee flexion isometric strength, agility, and 0–10 m and 0–30‐m sprint.

Pre‐test Post‐24 Post‐48 Post‐72
CK (IU/L) GW 162.91 ± 38.27 385.50 ± 188.67 b 496.58 ± 202.67 b 437.41 ± 198.49 b
VFR 132.66 ± 57.16 229.25 ± 81.79 a , b 191.58 ± 78.08 a + 166.00 ± 89.45 a
Hamstring soreness (mm) GW 1.91 ± 0.99 46.66 ± 17.36 b 50.83 ± 19.50 b 37.08 ± 21.05 b
VFR 2.33 ± 1.07 45.00 ± 13.65 b 31.92 ± 18.32 a , b 30.83 ± 18.44 b
Quadriceps soreness (mm) GW 1.75 ± 0.86 47.08 ± 22.10 b 55.00 ± 18.46 b 46.67 ± 17.10 b
VFR 1.58 ± 0.79 37.80 ± 14.84 b 29.58 ± 14.84 a , b 27.50 ± 12.34 a , b
Hip flexion ROM (o) GW 102.17 ± 6.59 102.91 ± 9.96 102.10 ± 11.22 100.87 ± 11.93
VFR 100.58 ± 12.64 106.17 ± 10.11 105.58 ± 13.49 109.25 ± 15.17
Strength (kg) GW 56.97 ± 6.50 49.72 ± 5.60 b 53.01 ± 5.40 b 55.55 ± 4.76
VFR 59.57 ± 8.29 59.76 ± 8.17 a 60.36 ± 7.17 a 62.45 ± 5.37 a
Agility (s) GW 12.22 ± 1.64 12.05 ± 1.10 11.98 ± 1.26 12.43 ± 1.24
VFR 12.65 ± 0.77 11.79 ± 0.96 b 11.38 ± 0.61 b 11.31 ± 0.69 a +
30‐m sprint (s) GW 4.61 ± 0.24 4.93 ± 0.37 b 4.79 ± 0.34 b 4.78 ± 0.15 b
VFR 4.62 ± 0.19 4.66 ± 0.20 a 4.64 ± 0.24 4.65 ± 0.23
0–10‐m sprint (s) GW 1.97 ± 0.10 2.05 ± 0.14 2.10 ± 0.16 2.10 ± 0.10
VFR 2.00 ± 0.08 1.99 ± 0.08 1.95 ± 0.11 a 1.94 ± 0.12 a
Open in a new tab
a

Statistically significant difference between GW (p < 0.05).

b

Significant difference between pre‐test (p < 0.05).

4.1. Plasma creatine kinase (CK)

For plasma CK, the results from the 2‐way repeated‐measures ANOVA indicated that there was a time × protocol interaction (F = 8.08; p < 0.001; partial η 2 = 0.29). The main effect of time was also significant (F = 17.20; p < 0.001; partial η 2 = 0.44). The follow‐up analyses showed that CK increased from pre to post‐24 h (p = 0.003), pre to post‐48 h (p < 0.001), and pre to post‐72 h (p = 0.001) for GW; from pre to post‐24 h (p < 0.001) and pre to post‐48 h (p = 0.001) for VFR, but the CK at 72 h showed no significant difference from the pre value. In addition, at post‐24–72 h, the CK values for VFR were significantly lower than GW protocol (p < 0.001) (Figure 1A).

FIGURE 1.

FIGURE 1

Open in a new tab

(A) Mean ± SD before (pretest), 1 day (post‐24 h), 2 days (post‐48 h), and 3 days (post‐72 h) after the multidirectional repeated sprints for plasma CK, (B) hip flexion passive ROM, (C, D) and muscle soreness.

4.2. Hip flexion passive range of motion

For hip ROM, the results from the 2‐way repeated‐measures ANOVA indicated that there was no time × protocol interaction (F = 2.74; p = 0.05; and partial η 2 = 0.11). There were no main effects for both time (F = 1.75; p = 0.16; and partial η 2 = 0.07) and protocol (p = 0.43) (Figure 1B).

4.3. Muscle soreness

For quadriceps muscle soreness, the results from the 2‐way repeated‐measures ANOVA indicated that there was a time × protocol interaction (F = 5.76; p = 0.001; and partial η 2 = 0.21). The main effect of time was also significant (F = 72.60; p < 0.001; and partial η 2 = 0.77).The follow‐up analyses showed that muscle soreness increased from pre to post‐24 h (p < 0.001), pre to post‐48 h (p < 0.001), and pre to post‐72 h (p < 0.001) for GW and VFR. At post‐48–72 h, the muscle soreness values for VFR were significantly lower than the GW protocol (p = 0.006).

For hamstrings muscle soreness, the results from the 2‐way repeated‐measures ANOVA indicated that there was a time × protocol interaction (F = 2.84; p = 0.001; and partial η 2 = 0.11). The main effect of time was also significant (F = 59.04; p < 0.001; and partial η 2 = 0.73).The follow‐up analyses showed that muscle soreness increased from pre to post‐24 h (p < 0.001), pre to post‐48 h (p < 0.001), and pre to post‐72 h (p < 0.001) for GW and VFR. At post‐48 h, the muscle soreness values for VFR were significantly lower than the GW protocol (p = 0.02) (Figure 1C,D).

4.4. Knee flexion isometric strength

For muscle isometric strength, the results from the 2‐way repeated‐measures ANOVA indicated that there was a time × protocol interaction (F = 3.01; p = 0.04; and partial η 2 = 0.12). The main effect of time was also significant (F = 4.53; p = 0.006; partial η 2 = 0.17). The follow‐up analyses showed that muscle strength decreased from pre to post‐24 h (p = 0.001) and pre to post‐48 h (p = 0.02) for GW, and no change for VFR (p > 0.05). At post‐24 48, and 72 h, the muscle strength values for VFR were significantly greater than the GW protocol (p = 0.005) (Figure 2A).

FIGURE 2.

FIGURE 2

Open in a new tab

(A) Mean ± SD before (pretest), 1 day (post‐24 h), 2 days (post‐48 h), and 3 days (post‐72 h) after the multi directional repeated sprints for knee flexion isometric strength, (B) agility, and 0–10 m and (C, D) 0–30‐m sprint.

4.5. Hexagon agility test

For agility, the results from the 2‐way repeated‐measures ANOVA indicated that there was a time × protocol interaction (F = 3.49; p = 0.02; and partial η 2 = 0.14). The main effect of time was also significant (F = 3.56; p = 0.02; and partial η 2 = 0.14). The follow‐up analyses showed that the agility time decreased from pre to post‐24 h (p = 0.003), pre to post‐48 h (p < 0.001), and pre to post‐72 h (p < 0.001) for VFR, and no change for GW (p > 0.05). At post‐72 h, the agility time for VFR was significantly lower than the GW protocol (p = 0.01) (Figure 2B).

4.6. Thirty‐m linear sprint

For 30‐m sprint, the results from the 2‐way repeated‐measures ANOVA indicated that there was a time × protocol interaction (F = 3.56; p = 0.02; and partial η 2 = 0.14). The main effect of time was also significant (F = 6.04; p = 0.001; and partial η 2 = 0.22). The follow‐up analyses showed that sprint time increased from pre to post‐24 h (p < 0.001), pre to post‐48 h (p = 0.009), and pre to post‐48 (p = 0.007) for GW, and no change for VFR (p > 0.05). At post‐24 h (p = 0.04), the sprint time for VFR was significantly lower than the GW protocol (p = 0.04).

For 0–10‐m sprint time, the results from the 2‐way repeated‐measures ANOVA indicated that there was a time × protocol interaction (F = 6.06; p = 0.001; and partial η 2 = 0.22). The main effect of time was not significant (F = 0.87; p = 0.46; and partial η 2 = 0.04). At post‐48 h (p = 0.017) and post‐72 h (p = 0.003), the sprint time for VFR was significantly lower than the GW protocol (Figure 2C,D).

5. DISCUSSION

The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of different warm‐up interventions (GW vs. VFR) on potential muscle damage induced by maximal multidirectional repeated sprints. A notable finding of this study is that VFR warm‐up exercises prior to the maximal sprints resulted in significantly less muscle damage and faster recovery than did the GW protocol.

This finding is in agreement with those of previous studies that massage or vibration (Imtiyaz et al., 2014) and rolling (West et al., 2020) treatment prior to eccentric exercises had preventive effects against muscle damage symptoms. Our results on the CK levels of the VFR group are consistent with those of Imtiyaz et al., who revealed that vibration (50 Hz) and massage interventions before eccentric exercises resulted in less muscle damage and, thus, lower levels of CK in the blood compared with a control intervention (Imtiyaz et al., 2014). Another study revealed that vibration treatment (50 Hz) applied to the left and right quadriceps, hamstrings, and calf muscles before a downhill treadmill walk resulted in significantly lower levels of CK compared with nonvibration treatment (Bakhtiary, Safavi‐Farokhi, & Aminian‐Far, 2007). The aforementioned protective effects can be attributed to several mechanisms, including neural, mechanical, and cellular adaptations (Imtiyaz et al., 2014; McHugh, 2003).

The low CK levels in the vibration group indicate less muscle damage and potentially less changes in myocyte membrane permeability (Imtiyaz et al., 2014). This reduction in DOMS was also observed in our study. Bakhtiary et al. (2007) proposed that the pressure from VFR may increase the PPT. Furthermore, the pressure from VFR may overload skin receptors, reducing pain perception (Wiewelhove et al., 2019). Other studies have reported a reduction in muscle strength and ROM following eccentric activities (Chen et al., 2011; West et al., 2020), although our findings demonstrate no such reduction in the VFR group. Vibration may stimulate the muscle spindles and increase their afferent activities, leading to increased intramuscular tension and motor unit activity synchronization (Ren et al., 2004; Shinohara et al., 2005); this could lead to increased force production and optimum neuromuscular function (Bakhtiary et al., 2007). A distribution of contractile stress over numerous active fibers can reduce damage to muscles (Aminian‐Far et al., 2011). Furthermore, vibration may engender a rapid increase in intramuscular temperature and blood flow (Lohman et al., 2012; MacDonald et al., 2014), leading to decreased muscle stiffness and less muscle damage responses (Aminian‐Far et al., 2011).

The muscle isometric strength did not fully recover at post‐24 and post‐48 h in the GW, which is significantly lower than VFR at post‐24, post‐48, and post‐72 h after the sprints. This result is within our expectation. Based on our results, the hamstring muscle (at post‐48 h) and quadriceps (at post‐48–72 h) muscle soreness for GW were significantly higher than VFR, resulting in reduced muscle strength. This finding is consistent with previous study, which revealed that a decrease in muscle strength was correlated to an increase in muscle soreness (Konrad et al., 2022). In addition, VFR interventions might improve muscular endurance in the lower limbs. For example, a study revealed that the knee flexor muscle group became more fatigue resistant after the dynamic stretching combined with VFR than after the general running warm‐up and dynamic stretching warm‐up protocols (Chen et al., 2023).

However, our study showed quicker agility time for VFR, and no change for GW after multi directional repeated sprints. This finding is consistent with a similar study, the study showed that the counter movement jump ability improved 1.8 cm after the 10 × 15 m repeated sprint ability test in straight‐line or with change of direction, that is, 10 x (7.5 + 7.5 m) in basketball players (Nikolaidis et al., 2016). The increase in agility ability in our study may also be due to the fact that the subjects actively engaged in VFR of the quadriceps and hamstrings. The authors reported that the quadriceps foam rolling in a modified plank position and the hamstrings rolling position in a seated upright position on the floor both induce lower abdominal activity and upper lumbar erector spine activity, the quadriceps foam rolling inducing large magnitude greater lower abdominals activity than hamstrings rolling position, and no significantly different compared to the general prone static plank exercise (Zahiri et al., 2022). In addition, the authors reported that moderate‐ and high‐intensity running provided greater activation of the back stabilizer muscles (Behm et al., 2009). Based on the above literature, the more activated core muscles could positively influence subsequent sports performance possibly due to better force transmission during upper‐ and lower‐body movements.

According to our review of the literature, a limited number of studies have examined the influences of preconditioning warm‐up protocols on subsequent exercise‐induced muscle damage. In this study, VFR exhibited immediate protective effects, even for the highly trained athletes.

Several limitations of this study must be mentioned. First, the current warm‐up intervention was performed on a population of young adults; whether these results are generalizable to athletes of other ages warrants investigation. Second, the vibrating roller was studied at only one frequency (48 Hz), which was within the optimum frequency range to prevent muscle damage. Third, the VFR duration was short, and its volume was small; hence, we could not determine how long the VFR effect could be maintained. If the effect was maintained for more than a week, it could have influenced the results.

6. CONCLUSIONS

Adding a set of VFR interventions to a regular warm‐up protocol prior to multidirectional repeated sprints is more beneficial for attenuating muscle damage and accelerating recovery than a regular warm‐up exercise. However, the hamstring isometric strength, agility, and sprint performance were not altered by the VFR intervention relative to the GW group. For athletes with demanding competition schedules during the competitive season, adding a VFR set to their regular warm‐up may assist recovery from multidirectional repeated sprint‐induced muscle damage, and thus potentially enhance their sports performance and reduce the possibility of hamstring strain injuries in later competitions.

7. PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS

Some coaches and trainers encourage their athletes to perform active DS before sprint training and competition. This study proposes that coaches and trainers incorporate VFR into their athletes' regular warm‐up protocols to assist with recovery from high‐intensity multidirectional repeated sprint‐induced muscle damage.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST STATEMENT

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

None.

REFERENCES

  1. Aminian‐Far, Atefeh , Hadian M.‐Reza, Olyaei Gholamreza, Talebian Saeed, and Bakhtiary Amir Hoshang. 2011. “Whole‐body Vibration and the Prevention and Treatment of Delayed‐Onset Muscle Soreness.” Journal of Athletic Training 46(1): 43–49. 10.4085/1062-6050-46.1.43. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Bakhtiary, A. H. , Safavi‐Farokhi Z., Aminian‐Far A., and Rezasoltani A.. 2007. “Influence of Vibration on Delayed Onset of Muscle Soreness Following Eccentric Exercise.” British Journal of Sports Medicine 41(3): 145–148. 10.1136/bjsm.2006.031278. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Beekhuizen, Kristina S. , Davis Maurice D., Kolber Morey J., and Cheng M.‐Shun S.. 2009. “Test‐retest Reliability and Minimal Detectable Change of the Hexagon Agility Test.” The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research 23(7): 2167–2171. 10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181b439f0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Behm, David G. , Blazevich Anthony J., Kay Anthony D., and McHugh Malachy. 2016. “Acute Effects of Muscle Stretching on Physical Performance, Range of Motion, and Injury Incidence in Healthy Active Individuals: a Systematic Review.” Applied Physiology Nutrition and Metabolism 41(1): 1–11. 10.1139/apnm-2015-0235. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Behm, David G. , Cappa Dario, and Power Geoffrey A.. 2009. “Trunk Muscle Activation during Moderate‐ and High‐Intensity Running.” Applied Physiology Nutrition and Metabolism 34(6): 1008–1016. 10.1139/H09-102. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Boukhris, Omar , Trabelsi Khaled, Abdessalem Raouf, Hsouna Hsen, Ammar Achraf, Glenn Jordan M., Bott Nick, et al. 2020. “Effects of the 5‐m Shuttle Run Test on Markers of Muscle Damage, Inflammation, and Fatigue in Healthy Male Athletes.” International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 17(12): 4375. 10.3390/ijerph17124375. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Chen, Che Hsiu , Chen Yung Sheng, Wang Yi Tse, Tseng Wei Chin, and Ye Xin. 2018. “Effects of Preconditioning Hamstring Resistance Exercises on Repeated Sprinting‐Induced Muscle Damage in Female Soccer Players.” Biology of Sport 35(3): 269–275. 10.5114/biolsport.2018.77827. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Chen, C.‐Hsiu , Chiu C.‐Hui, Tseng W.‐Chin, Wu C.‐Yen, Su H.‐Hsun, Chang C.‐K. M., and Ye Xin. 2023. “Acute Effects of Combining Dynamic Stretching and Vibration Foam Rolling Warm‐Up on Lower‐Limb Muscle Performance and Functions in Female Handball Players.” The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research 37(6): 1277–1283. 10.1519/JSC.0000000000003998. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Chen, C.‐Hsiu , Huang T.‐Shun, Chai H.‐Ming, Jan M.‐Hwa, and Lin J.‐Jenq. 2013. “Two Stretching Treatments for the Hamstrings: Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation versus Kinesio Taping.” Journal of Sport Rehabilitation 22(1): 59–66. 10.1123/jsr.22.1.59. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Chen, C.‐Hsiu , Nosaka Kazunori, Chen H.‐Lian, Lin M.‐Ju, Tseng K.‐Wei, and Chen Trevor C.. 2011. “Effects of Flexibility Training on Eccentric Exercise‐Induced Muscle Damage.” Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise 43(3): 491–500. 10.1249/MSS.0b013e3181f315ad. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Chen, C.‐Hsiu , Ye Xin, Wang Yi‐Tse, Chen Y.‐Sheng, and Tseng W.‐Chin. 2018. “Differential Effects of Different Warm‐Up Protocols on Repeated Sprints‐Induced Muscle Damage.” The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research 32(11): 3276–3284. 10.1519/JSC.0000000000002310. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Costa, Pablo B. , Herda Trent J., Herda Ashley A., and Cramer Joel T.. 2014. “Effects of Dynamic Stretching on Strength, Muscle Imbalance, and Muscle Activation.” Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise 46(3): 586–593. 10.1249/MSS.0000000000000138. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. de Benito, Ana María , Valldecabres Raúl, Ceca Diego, Richards Jim, Barrachina Igual Joaquín, and Pablos Ana. 2019. “Effect of Vibration vs Non‐vibration Foam Rolling Techniques on Flexibility, Dynamic Balance and Perceived Joint Stability after Fatigue.” PeerJ 7: e8000. 10.7717/peerj.8000. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Duthie, Grant , Pyne David, and Hooper Sue. 2003. “Applied Physiology and Game Analysis of Rugby Union.” Sports Medicine 33(13): 973–991. 10.2165/00007256-200333130-00003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Haddad, Monoem , Prince Mohammad Shoaib, Zarrouk Nidhal, Tabben Montassar, Behm David G., and Chamari Karim. 2019. “Dynamic Stretching Alone Can Impair Slower Velocity Isokinetic Performance of Young Male Handball Players for at Least 24 Hours.” PLoS One 14(1): e0210318. 10.1371/journal.pone.0210318. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Howatson, Glyn , and Milak Adi. 2009. “Exercise‐induced Muscle Damage Following a Bout of Sport Specific Repeated Sprints.” The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research 23(8): 2419–2424. 10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181bac52e. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Hsu, F.‐Yu , Tsai K.‐Lan, Lee C.‐Lun, Chang W.‐Dien, and Chang N.‐Jen. 2020. “Effects of Dynamic Stretching Combined with Static Stretching, Foam Rolling, or Vibration Rolling as a Warm‐Up Exercise on Athletic Performance in Elite Table Tennis Players.” Journal of Sport Rehabilitation 30(2): 1–8. 10.1123/jsr.2019-0442. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Imtiyaz, Shagufta , Veqar Zubia, and Shareef M. Y.. 2014. “To Compare the Effect of Vibration Therapy and Massage in Prevention of Delayed Onset Muscle Soreness (DOMS).” Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research 8(1): 133–136. 10.7860/JCDR/2014/7294.3971. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Karcher, Claude , and Buchheit Martin. 2014. “On‐court Demands of Elite Handball, with Special Reference to Playing Positions.” Sports Medicine 44(6): 797–814. 10.1007/s40279-014-0164-z. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Keane, Karen M. , Salicki Rebecca, Goodall Stuart, Thomas Kevin, and Howatson Glyn. 2015. “Muscle Damage Response in Female Collegiate Athletes after Repeated Sprint Activity.” The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research 29(10): 2802–2807. 10.1519/JSC.0000000000000961. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Kim, Ji‐Yun , Kang Da‐Haeng, Lee J.‐Hee, O S. M., and Jeon J.‐Keun. 2017. “The Effects of Pre‐exercise Vibration Stimulation on the Exercise‐Induced Muscle Damage.” Journal of Physical Therapy Science 29(1): 119–122. 10.1589/jpts.29.119. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Konrad, Andreas , Kasahara Kazuki, Yoshida Riku, Yahata Kaoru, Sato Shigeru, Murakami Yuta, Aizawa Kodai, Nakamura Masatoshi, and Nakamura M.. 2022. “Relationship between Eccentric‐Exercise‐Induced Loss in Muscle Function to Muscle Soreness and Tissue Hardness.” Healthcare 10(1): 96. 10.3390/healthcare10010096. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Lee, C.‐Lun , Chu I.‐Hua, Lyu Bo‐Jhang, Chang W.‐Dien, and Chang N.‐Jen. 2018. “Comparison of Vibration Rolling, Nonvibration Rolling, and Static Stretching as a Warm‐Up Exercise on Flexibility, Joint Proprioception, Muscle Strength, and Balance in Young Adults.” Journal of Sports Sciences 36(22): 2575–2582. 10.1080/02640414.2018.1469848. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Lin, W. C. , Lee C. L., and Chang N. J.. 2020. “Acute Effects of Dynamic Stretching Followed by Vibration Foam Rolling on Sports Performance of Badminton Athletes.” Journal of Sports Science and Medicine 19(2): 420–428. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Lohman III, Everett B. , Sackiriyas Kanikkai Steni Balan, Bains Gurinder S., Calandra Giovanni, Lobo Crystal, Nakhro Daniel, Malthankar Gauri, Paul Sherwine, and Paul S.. 2012. “A Comparison of Whole Body Vibration and Moist Heat on Lower Extremity Skin Temperature and Skin Blood Flow in Healthy Older Individuals.” Medical Science Monitor 18(7): CR415–424. 10.12659/msm.883209. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. MacDonald, Graham Z. , Button Duane C., Drinkwater Eric J., and Behm David George. 2014. “Foam Rolling as a Recovery Tool after an Intense Bout of Physical Activity.” Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise 46(1): 131–142. 10.1249/MSS.0b013e3182a123db. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Magoffin, Ryan D. , Parcell Allen C., Hyldahl Robert D., Fellingham Gilbert W., Hopkins J. Tyson, and Feland J. Brent. 2020. “Whole‐Body Vibration as a Warm‐Up before Exercise‐Induced Muscle Damage on Symptoms of Delayed‐Onset Muscle Soreness in Trained Subjects.” The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research 34(4): 1123–1132. 10.1519/jsc.0000000000002896. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. McCall, Alan , Nedelec Mathieu, Carling Christopher, Le Gall Franck, Berthoin Serge, and Dupont Gregory. 2015. “Reliability and Sensitivity of a Simple Isometric Posterior Lower Limb Muscle Test in Professional Football Players.” Journal of Sports Sciences 33(12): 1298–1304. 10.1080/02640414.2015.1022579. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. McHugh, Malachy P. 2003. “Recent Advances in the Understanding of the Repeated Bout Effect: the Protective Effect against Muscle Damage from a Single Bout of Eccentric Exercise.” Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports 13(2): 88–97. 10.1034/j.1600-0838.2003.02477.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Nikolaidis, P. T. , Meletakos P., Tasiopoulos I., Kostoulas I., and Ganavias P.. 2016. “Acute Responses to 10x15 M Repeated Sprint Ability Exercise in Adolescent Athletes: the Role of Change of Direction and Sport Specialization.” Asian Journal of Sports Medicine 7(2): e30255. 10.5812/asjsm.30255. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Opplert, Jules , and Babault Nicolas. 2018. “Acute Effects of Dynamic Stretching on Muscle Flexibility and Performance: An Analysis of the Current Literature.” Sports Medicine 48(2): 299–325. 10.1007/s40279-017-0797-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Reiner, Marina Maren , Glashüttner Christoph, Bernsteiner Daniel, Tilp Markus, Guilhem Gael, Morales‐Artacho Antonio, and Konrad Andreas. 2021. “A Comparison of Foam Rolling and Vibration Foam Rolling on the Quadriceps Muscle Function and Mechanical Properties.” European Journal of Applied Physiology 121(5): 1461–1471. 10.1007/s00421-021-04619-2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Ren, J. C. , Fan X. L., Song X. A., and Li Q.. 2004. “[Influence of 100 Hz Sinusoidal Vibration on Muscle Spindle Afferents of Soleus Muscles in Suspended Situation Rat].” Space Medicine & Medical Engineering 17(5): 340–344. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Romero‐Moraleda, B. , Gonzalez‐Garcia J., Cuellar‐Rayo A., Balsalobre‐Fernandez C., Munoz‐Garcia D., and Morencos E.. 2019. “Effects of Vibration and Non‐vibration Foam Rolling on Recovery after Exercise with Induced Muscle Damage.” Journal of Sports Science and Medicine 18(1): 172–180. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. Sekir, U. , Arabaci R., Akova B., and Kadagan S. M.. 2010. “Acute Effects of Static and Dynamic Stretching on Leg Flexor and Extensor Isokinetic Strength in Elite Women Athletes.” Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports 20(2): 268–281. 10.1111/j.1600-0838.2009.00923.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  36. Shinohara, Minoru , Moritz Chet T., Pascoe Michael A., and Enoka Roger M.. 2005. “Prolonged Muscle Vibration Increases Stretch Reflex Amplitude, Motor Unit Discharge Rate, and Force Fluctuations in a Hand Muscle.” Journal of Applied Physiology 99(5): 1835–1842. 10.1152/japplphysiol.00312.2005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  37. Small, K. , McNaughton L., Greig M., and Lovell R.. 2010. “The Effects of Multidirectional Soccer‐specific Fatigue on Markers of Hamstring Injury Risk.” Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport 13(1): 120–125. 10.1016/j.jsams.2008.08.005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. Tan, Jingwang , Shi Xiaojian, Witchalls Jeremy, Waddington Gordon, Lun Fu Allan C., Wu Sam, Tirosh Oren, Wu Xueping, Han Jia, and Han J.. 2020. “Effects of Pre‐exercise Acute Vibration Training on Symptoms of Exercise‐Induced Muscle Damage: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis.” The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research 36(8): 2339–2348. 10.1519/JSC.0000000000003789. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. Thompson, D. , Nicholas C. W., and Williams C.. 1999. “Muscular Soreness Following Prolonged Intermittent High‐Intensity Shuttle Running.” Journal of Sports Sciences 17(5): 387–395. 10.1080/026404199365902. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  40. Timmins, R. G. , Opar D. A., Williams M. D., Schache A. G., Dear N. M., and Shield A. J.. 2014. “Reduced Biceps Femoris Myoelectrical Activity Influences Eccentric Knee Flexor Weakness after Repeat Sprint Running.” Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports 24(4): e299–e305. 10.1111/sms.12171. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  41. West, Jonathan T. , Miller William M., Jeon Sunggun, and Ye Xin. 2020. “The Effects of a Preconditioning Rolling Session on Subsequent Eccentric Exercise‐Induced Muscle Damage.” The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research 34(8): 2112–2119. 10.1519/JSC.0000000000003678. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  42. Wiewelhove, Thimo , Döweling Alexander, Schneider Christoph, Hottenrott Laura, Meyer Tim, Kellmann Michael, Pfeiffer Mark, Ferrauti Alexander, and Ferrauti A.. 2019. “A Meta‐Analysis of the Effects of Foam Rolling on Performance and Recovery.” Frontiers in Physiology 10: 376. 10.3389/fphys.2019.00376. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  43. Zahiri, Ali , Alizadeh Shahab, Daneshjoo Abdolhamid, Pike Nick, Konrad Andreas, and Behm David G.. 2022. “Core Muscle Activation with Foam Rolling and Static Planks.” Frontiers in Physiology 13: 852094. 10.3389/fphys.2022.852094. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from European Journal of Sport Science are provided here courtesy of Wiley

RESOURCES