Color poster with text, tables, and graphs.The purpose of this study was to compare the use of foam-rolling to dynamic warm-up on flexibility, power, speed, endurance, and balance in young recreationally active adults.University of Wisconsin--Eau Claire Office of Research and Sponsored Programs

Boesel, Chelsea

Caslavka, Brynn

Ferestad, Rachel

Gytri, Hannah

Melby, Tiffany

English

Minds@University of Wisconsin

 The Effects of Myofascial Release and  Dynamic Warm-up on Exercise Performance  Department of Kinesiology, University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire, Eau Claire, Wisconsin  Chelsea Boesel, Brynn Caslavka, Rachel Ferestad, Hannah Gytri, Tiffany Melby Faculty Advisors: Gary P. Van Guilder, PhD; Jeffrey Janot, PhD  ABSTRACT    Randomized Order Experimental Design Phase 1: Familiarization All of the sixteen subjects participated in a one-week orientation to familiarize them with the warm-up protocols and performance tests.  Frequency: Occurred one time for each subject. Type: Familiarized to the vertical jump, 40-yard sprint, one-mile run, and balance test and performed the sit-and-reach (3 trials). Phase 2: Randomized Warm-Up Sessions Each subject completed three separate warm-up trials in a randomized order (myofascial release, dynamic warm-up, and standard jog) for 15 min. Time: 15 minutes of either myofascial roll-out or dynamic exercises or a 5-minute warm-up jog. Myofascial roll-out exercises include: gluteus maximus, hamstrings, quadriceps, gastrocnemius, iliotibial band, and adductors. Exercises were performed twice, each set being 30 seconds on each leg with one minute rest between sets. Dynamic exercises included: overhead squat, spidermans, lunge with hip flexor stretch, inchworm, butt kicks, leg swings, frankenstein's, and leg lifts.  Exercises were performed twice, each set being 30 seconds with 20 seconds rest and one minute rest between sets. Phase 3: Performance Testing (3 separate days)  Frequency: A series of five separate performance tests were completed immediately following each warm-up trial. A minimum 48 hours rest period was implemented between each warm-up performance testing session. Type: Performance tests included sit-and-reach (3 trials), vertical jump (3 trials), 40-yd sprint (3 trials), one-mile run (1 trial), and balance (3 trials).  SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS  METHODS Subjects Sixteen adults between the ages of 18-26 years participated in three warm-up sessions followed by a series of exercise performance tests.  Participants were recruited by flyers, word-of-mouth, and social networking from the University of Wisconsin–Eau Claire student body.  All subjects provided written informed consent according to the guidelines of the University of Wisconsin–Eau Claire.  RESULTS Our data indicated that foam roll-out had negative effects on vertical jump for women. In contrast, sit-and-reach was improved following dynamic warm-up: this improvement was primarily driven by the men.  Warm-up technique showed no significant effects on balance, 40-yard dash, and one-mile run.   This study is valuable for recreational athletes looking for the best warm-up to enhance power and flexibility.  Limitations include small sample size and similarity of subject characteristics. Future research may include increasing study length with subjects assigned to one warm-up to determine long-term effects of warm-up on performance.   We would like to thank all of the participants for volunteering in our study along with Dr. Gary Van Guilder and Dr. Jeffrey Janot for their assistance in our research efforts.  We would also like to recognize the Department of Kinesiology at the University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire for the use of equipment, work space and supplies necessary to complete this study.   BACKGROUND  Fascia, a type of connective tissue that covers your muscles, provides support and structure for the body.  The fascia could tighten up and restrict movement, which may reduce exercise performance.  Release of the fascia, termed myofascial release, can be accomplished by using foam rollers or by performing a dynamic warm-up; these methods may enhance exercise performance.  If fascia is restricted injuries may result. An example of this is plantar fasciitis, which causes stiffness, pain in the toes and heal and a decrease in sport performance.  Understanding the impact and effects of different warm-up techniques is vital for recreational athletes to improve performance results and decrease the risk of injury.  Currently, there is limited research on the effects of various modes of myofascial release on exercise performance.   EXPERIMENTAL AIM AND HYPOTHESIS To compare the effects of dynamic warm-up that targets leg muscle fascia to a standard myofascial release treatment using foam-rollers on maximum flexibility, power, speed, endurance, and balance in young adults.  We hypothesize that dynamic warm-up exercises targeting leg muscle fascia will improve flexibility, power, speed, endurance, and balance compared to a standard myofascial release treatment using foam roll-out and control.    ACKNOWLEDGMENTS STATISTICAL ANALYSIS PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to compare the use of foam-rolling to dynamic warm-up on flexibility, power, speed, endurance, and balance in young recreationally active adults. This study is valuable for recreational athletes looking for the best warm-up to enhance flexibility, power, speed, endurance, and balance performance. METHODS: Sixteen young (age range: 18-26 years) healthy recreationally active adults (8 women, 8 men) participated in this study. Participants were recruited from the University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire student body. Each subject was randomized to complete three series of exercise performance tests separated by at least 48 hours following three different 15 minute warm-up trials (i.e., control 5 minute jogging warm-up, myofascial release using foam roll-out method, and select dynamic warm-up exercises targeting leg muscle fascia). The exercise performance tests included a triplicate assessment of trunk flexibility (sit and reach), maximum vertical jump height, laser-timed 40-yd running sprint, and standing balance test (Biodex balance). A maximal 1-mile timed run was used to assess aerobic endurance following each warm-up trial. RESULTS: Trunk flexibility was significantly improved following the dynamic warm-up trial (34.5±8.6 cm) compared with the foam roll-out method (32.4±9.8 cm) and control (32.4±9.6 cm); these changes were observed in the men rather than women subjects. Vertical jump performance was significantly reduced with foam roll-out (49.3±12.9 cm) compared to control (52.9±13.9 cm) and dynamic warm-up (52.2±15.9 cm). Interestingly, vertical jump performance was impaired in women but not men as indicated in separate gender analyses. There was no influence with warm-up technique on the 40-yard dash, one-leg standing balance, or mile run performance. CONCLUSIONS: Trunk flexibility as measured by the sit-and-reach test was significantly improved with dynamic warm-up compared to the control and foam roll-out groups. Furthermore, the improvement in sit-and-reach was driven by the men. Foam roll-out impairs vertical jump performance. There was no influence of warm-up technique on 40-yard dash, mile run, or balance.    Key Words: foam roll-out, fascia, explosive muscle power, stability I. Subject characteristics for the entire study population II. Vertical jump performance following each warm-up trial in women (A) and men (B). * P<0.05 versus control. III. Trunk flexibility via the Sit-and Reach test showed statistically significant increases after dynamic warm-up compared to control and foam roll-out conditions (P< 0.05 versus control; ┼P<0.05 versus foam roll-out).  The primary dependent variables were exercise performance measures. The independent variables were warm-up (control, myofascial foam roll-out, dynamic warm-up). Subject characteristics were determined by descriptive analyses. Changes in performance tests following each warm-up trial were determined using a repeated measures analysis of variance adjusted for multiple comparisons using Bonferroni’s test. Data are presented as mean±SD. Statistical significance was set at P<0.05. Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS software version 17.0 (SPSS Inc). A. B. * ┼ * Vertical jump height (cm) Vertical jump height (cm) Sit and Reach (cm) Total Group (N=16) Women (n=8) Men (n=8) Variable Control MF Dynamic Control MF Dynamic Control MF Dynamic  Sit-and-Reach (cm) 32.4±9.3 32.4±9.8 34.3±8.3*Ɨ 37.1±8.0 38.1±7.9 37.8±7.4 27.7±8.4 27.3±8.7 30.8±8.0*Ɨ  Vertical Jump (cm) 52.6±13.5 49.3±13.0* 52.0±15.4 42.4±6.7 38.6±6.8* 39.2±6.3 62.9±10.3 58.6±9.2 64.9±9.5  40-yd  Dash (sec) 6.0±0.7 6.0±0.7 6.0±0.6 6.6±0.5 6.7±0.5 6.5±0.5 5.5±0.2 5.5±0.3 5.5±0.3  1 Mile Run (min) 7.9±1.0 7.8±0.9 7.9±1.0 8.6±1.0 8.5±0.9 8.6±1.0 7.2±0.6 7.2±0.5 7.2±0.6  Overall Balance 2.0±0.6 1.8±0.7 1.8±0.5 1.9±0.8 1.6±0.6 1.6±0.5 2.0±0.4 2.0±0.7 2.0±0.3  Balance-A/P 1.5±0.6 1.3±0.4 1.2±0.5 1.5±0.7 1.1±0.4 1.1±0.6 1.5±0.4 1.4±0.4 1.4±0.2  Balance-ML 1.1±0.4 1.2±0.6 1.1±0.4 1.0±0.6 1.1±0.7 1.0±0.4 1.2±0.2 1.3±0.5 1.2±0.3  MF: myofascial foam roll-out; A/P: anterior/posterior; ML: medial-lateral. *P<0.05 versus control; Ɨ P<0.05 versus MF  

Effects of Myofascial Release and Dynamic Warm-up on Exercise Performance

http://digital.library.wisc.edu/1793/62946

Effects of Myofascial Release and Dynamic Warm-up on Exercise Performance

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Minds@University of Wisconsin