Scholarlink

Background <p>This study investigated the comparative acute effects of 3 × 30 s of vibration foam rolling (VFR) or percussive massage (PM) on the hamstring muscles, specifically range of motion (ROM), maximum voluntary isometric contraction (MVIC), and muscle stiffness, using shear wave elastography (SWE), tensiomyography (TMG), and the MyotonPro. Further, the correlation between the three stiffness measures was examined. </p> Methods <p>Seventeen participants (27.1 ± 3.1 years; 7 females) were randomized to VFR or PM on two occasions. Muscle stiffness of the biceps femoris (BF) was assessed at baseline and immediately post-intervention with SWE, TMG, and the MyotonPro. A sit-and-reach test was conducted and MVIC of the hamstring muscles was measured unilaterally.</p> Results <p>A significant time effect was observed for MVIC torque (p = 0.01, ƞ² = 0.319). ROM and BF muscle stiffness were unaffected by either intervention. No significant associations were found between the stiffness measurements from the three techniques.</p> Conclusion <p>The acute application of 3 × 30 s of VFR or PM did not enhance ROM or alter BF muscle stiffness. However, both interventions reduced MVIC torque, with no significant difference between them. The lack of correlation between the SWE, TMG, and MyotonPro measurements suggests that these techniques cannot be used or interpreted interchangeably.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Effects of percussive massage vs. foam rolling on hamstring function: a comparative study using shear wave elastography, tensiomyography, and MyotonPro

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年5月16日

查看全文
  • Josef Fischer,
  • Josefina Manieu Seguel,
  • Kristina Drole,
  • Andreas Konrad,
  • Markus Tilp,
  • Armin H. Paravlic

摘要

Background

This study investigated the comparative acute effects of 3 × 30 s of vibration foam rolling (VFR) or percussive massage (PM) on the hamstring muscles, specifically range of motion (ROM), maximum voluntary isometric contraction (MVIC), and muscle stiffness, using shear wave elastography (SWE), tensiomyography (TMG), and the MyotonPro. Further, the correlation between the three stiffness measures was examined.

Methods

Seventeen participants (27.1 ± 3.1 years; 7 females) were randomized to VFR or PM on two occasions. Muscle stiffness of the biceps femoris (BF) was assessed at baseline and immediately post-intervention with SWE, TMG, and the MyotonPro. A sit-and-reach test was conducted and MVIC of the hamstring muscles was measured unilaterally.

Results

A significant time effect was observed for MVIC torque (p = 0.01, ƞ² = 0.319). ROM and BF muscle stiffness were unaffected by either intervention. No significant associations were found between the stiffness measurements from the three techniques.

Conclusion

The acute application of 3 × 30 s of VFR or PM did not enhance ROM or alter BF muscle stiffness. However, both interventions reduced MVIC torque, with no significant difference between them. The lack of correlation between the SWE, TMG, and MyotonPro measurements suggests that these techniques cannot be used or interpreted interchangeably.