The effect of foam rolling on local and distant pain sensitivity assessed with pressure pain thresholds in healthy participants and musculoskeletal pain patients: A systematic review
Christoph Habscheid, Tibor M. Szikszay, Kerstin Luedtke Ph
{"title":"The effect of foam rolling on local and distant pain sensitivity assessed with pressure pain thresholds in healthy participants and musculoskeletal pain patients: A systematic review","authors":"Christoph Habscheid, Tibor M. Szikszay, Kerstin Luedtke Ph","doi":"10.1016/j.jbmt.2024.05.027","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>The self-treatment with a foam roller is a popular form of myofascial release, although the underlying mechanisms, particularly on pain sensitivity, remain unclear. It is hypothesized that the hypoalgesic local effects are probably due to changes in fascial and muscle tissue, whereas remote effects may be influenced by central endogenous pain modulation. This systematic review aimed to quantify the difference between local and remote hypoalgesic effects of the foam rolling intervention.</p></div><div><h3>Method</h3><p>A systematic search was conducted in the databases Pubmed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and CINAHL. Published randomized controlled trials and non-randomized controlled trials investigating the effects of foam rolling on Pressure Pain Thresholds (PPTs) in healthy individuals and patients with musculoskeletal pain were included. Quality assessment and evidence synthesis were performed according to Cochrane Handbook recommendations. A meta-analysis was performed using standardized mean differences and 95% CIs.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Local PPTs changed after rolling in a pre-post comparison with a small effect size: SMD = −0.42 (95 % CI = −0.57 to −0.26); I2 = 1 %. Remote PPTs also changed after rolling in a pre-post comparison with a small effect size: SMD = −0.47 (95 % CI = −0.80 to −0.14); I2 = 0 %. Foam rolling showed no effect on local PPTs when compared with a control group: SMD = 0.10 (95 % CI = −0.19 to 0.39); I2 = 0 %.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>No consistent effects of foam rolling on PPTs were demonstrated in healthy individuals.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":1,"journal":{"name":"Accounts of Chemical Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":16.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1360859224003073/pdfft?md5=4753259881ca8c521bf69ecaf7614ead&pid=1-s2.0-S1360859224003073-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accounts of Chemical Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1360859224003073","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"化学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction
The self-treatment with a foam roller is a popular form of myofascial release, although the underlying mechanisms, particularly on pain sensitivity, remain unclear. It is hypothesized that the hypoalgesic local effects are probably due to changes in fascial and muscle tissue, whereas remote effects may be influenced by central endogenous pain modulation. This systematic review aimed to quantify the difference between local and remote hypoalgesic effects of the foam rolling intervention.
Method
A systematic search was conducted in the databases Pubmed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and CINAHL. Published randomized controlled trials and non-randomized controlled trials investigating the effects of foam rolling on Pressure Pain Thresholds (PPTs) in healthy individuals and patients with musculoskeletal pain were included. Quality assessment and evidence synthesis were performed according to Cochrane Handbook recommendations. A meta-analysis was performed using standardized mean differences and 95% CIs.
Results
Local PPTs changed after rolling in a pre-post comparison with a small effect size: SMD = −0.42 (95 % CI = −0.57 to −0.26); I2 = 1 %. Remote PPTs also changed after rolling in a pre-post comparison with a small effect size: SMD = −0.47 (95 % CI = −0.80 to −0.14); I2 = 0 %. Foam rolling showed no effect on local PPTs when compared with a control group: SMD = 0.10 (95 % CI = −0.19 to 0.39); I2 = 0 %.
Conclusion
No consistent effects of foam rolling on PPTs were demonstrated in healthy individuals.
期刊介绍:
Accounts of Chemical Research presents short, concise and critical articles offering easy-to-read overviews of basic research and applications in all areas of chemistry and biochemistry. These short reviews focus on research from the author’s own laboratory and are designed to teach the reader about a research project. In addition, Accounts of Chemical Research publishes commentaries that give an informed opinion on a current research problem. Special Issues online are devoted to a single topic of unusual activity and significance.
Accounts of Chemical Research replaces the traditional article abstract with an article "Conspectus." These entries synopsize the research affording the reader a closer look at the content and significance of an article. Through this provision of a more detailed description of the article contents, the Conspectus enhances the article's discoverability by search engines and the exposure for the research.