TABLE 5.
The effects of foam rolling on delayed-onset muscle soreness.
| Author (year) | Study design | Sample | Foam rolling intervention |
Nature of exercise | Control | Others experimental groups | Outcome measures | Effects | ||||
| Tool(s) | Targeted area | Treatment time and rate | Intensity | Experience | ||||||||
| Casanova et al. (2017) | RC | 10 athletes | Roller massager | Plantar flexors | 6 × 45 s 30 bpm | NR | 1 test session | 5 × 201-leg calf raise at BW | Yes | Foam rolling leg Control leg | Gastrocnemius PPT Ankle dorsiflexion Muscle morphology Muscle oxygenation Plantar flexion, dorsiflexion MVIC pre- and post-T0, T+1, 24, 48, 72 h | ↑ muscle tenderness ↑ ankle ROM NS change muscle oxygenation (HHb concentration) NS change muscle morphology NS change muscle performance |
| Jay et al. (2014) | RCT | 22 healthy untrained | Roller massager | Hamstring | 1 × 10 min 15–30 bpm | Moderate | NR | 10 × 10 stiff-legged deadlift up to 32 kg | Yes | Foam rolling leg Control leg | Pain VAS-10 HamstringsPPT 1-leg sit-and-reach box test pre- and post- T0, T+10, 30, 60 min | ↑ muscle tenderness up to 60 min ↓ muscle soreness up to 60 min ↑ ROM at 10 min Controlateral effect ↓ muscle soreness Tend ↑ muscle tenderness Trend ↑ ROM |
| MacDonald et al. (2014) | RCT | 20 healthy and recreationally active | High density FR | Main lower limb muscles | 2 × 60 s/muscle | NR | 1 test session | 10 × 10 squat at 60% of 1-RM | Yes | Foam rolling | BS-11 NRS Modified kneeling lunge Physical test and contractile properties pre- and post-T0, T+48, 72h | ↓ muscle soreness ↑ performances ↑ muscle activity |
| Pearcey et al. (2015) | RC | 8 healthy and physically active | High density FR | Main lower limb muscles | 2 × 45 s/muscle 50 bpm | Much pressure as they could | Yes | 10 × 10 squat at 60% of 1-RM | Yes | Foam rolling | Quadriceps PPT Physical tests pre- and post-T+24, 48, 72 h | ↑ muscle tenderness ↑ physical performance decrements |
| Correira (2016) | RC | 10 healthy and recreationnaly active | Roller massager | Plantar flexors | 6 × 45 s 30 bpm | Much pressure as they could | 1 test session | 5 × 20 1-leg calf raise at BW | Yes | Foam rolling | Plantar PPT Dorsiflexion ROM Plantar MVIC Muscle morphology Muscle oxygenation pre- and post- T0, T+1 h, 24, 48, 72 h | ↑ muscle tenderness at T+24 h, 48 h, 72 h NS change ROM NS change muscular performance NS change morphology NS change muscle oxygenation |
| Romero-Moraleda et al. (2017) | RCT | 32 healthy and moderately active | High density FR | Quadriceps | 5 × 60 s | Much pressure as they could | NR | 5 × 20 0,5 m drop jumps | No | Neurodynamic mobilization Foam rolling | Numerical pain rating scale-10 Knee extension MVIC | Both groups : ↓ muscle pain Foam roller group ↑ muscle strength |
| Drinkwater et al. (2019) | RC | 11 healthy young males | High density FR | Main lower limb muscles | 1 × 180 s/muscle 60 bpm | Much pressure as they could | 1 test session | 6 × 25 eccentric knee extensors at 120°/s | Yes | Foam rolling post-T0 and before each testing point at T+24, 48, 72 h | PPT rectus femoris Mid-thigh circumference Knee flexion ROM CMJ MVIC right knee extensor | ↑ muscle tenderness at T+48h NS change circumference NS change knee ROM ↑ vertical jump at 72 h NS change strength |
| Naderi et al. (2019) | RCT | 80 healthy physically active male | High density FR | Quadriceps | 4 × 120 s 30 bpm | Much pressure as they could | 1 test session | 4 × 25 eccentric knee extensors at 60°/s | Yes | Foam rolling post- T0, T+1, 24, 48, 72 h | Pain VAS-10 PPT Quadriceps muscle strength Joint position sense Isometric force sense pre- and post- T+1, T+24, 48, 72 h | ↓ muscle pain ↑ muscle tenderness ↑ proprioception ↓ force decrements up to 48h |
| Romero-Moraleda et al. (2019) | RCT | 38 healthy and moderately active | Vibrating FR Non-vibrating FR | Quadriceps | 5 × 60 s | Much pressure as they could | NR | 10 × 10 inertial flywheel eccentric squat | No | Foam rolling with vibrating roller (18Hz) Foam rolling with classic roller | Pain VAS-10 Quadriceps PPT Muscle oxygen saturation CMJ Active and passive hip extension ROM Knee flexion ROM | Vibrating > non-vibrating FR ↑ muscle tenderness ↓ pain perception ↑ passive hip extension Both FR ↑ muscle oxygenation (SmO2) ↑ vertical power ↑ active hip and knee ROM |
RC, randomized crossover; RCT, randomized controlled trial; FR, foam roller, BW, body weight; VAS, visual analogue scale; PPT, pressure pain threshold; NR, not reported; bpm, beats per minute; NS, not significant; ↑ indicates increase; ↓ indicates decrease.