Self-Massage Techniques for the Management of Pain and Mobility With Application to Resistance Training: A Brief Review

ABSTRACT

MacLennan, M, Ramirez-Campillo, R, and Byrne, PJ. Self-massage techniques for the management of pain and mobility with application to resistance training: a brief review. J Strength Cond Res 37(11): 2314-2323, 2023-Fascial restrictions that occur in response to myofascial trigger points (MTrP), exercise-induced muscle damage (EIMD), and delayed onset of muscle soreness (DOMS) cause soft tissue to lose extensibility, which contributes to abnormal muscle mechanics, reduced muscle length, and decrements in joint range of motion (ROM) and actively contributes to musculoskeletal pain. Resistance training and in particular, weightlifting movements have unique mobility requirements imperative for movement efficacy and safety with ROM restrictions resulting in ineffective volume and intensity tolerance and dampened force output and power, which may lead to a failed lift or injury. Self-massage (SM) provides an expedient method to promote movement efficiency and reduce injury risk by improving ROM, muscular function, and reducing pain and allows athletes to continue to train at their desired frequency with minimal disruption from MTrPs-associated adverse effects. Thus, the aim of this review was to determine the efficacy of various self-massage tools in managing pain and mobility and to explore the potential benefits of SM on resistance training performance. Many SM devices are available for athletes to manage ROM restrictions and pain, including differing densities of foam rollers, roller massagers, tennis balls, and vibrating devices. To attenuate adverse training effects, a 10-to-20-minute bout consisting of 2-minute bouts of SM on the affected area may be beneficial. When selecting a SM device, athletes should note that foam rollers appear to be more effective than roller massagers, with vibrating foam rollers eliciting an increased reduction to pain perception, and tennis balls and soft massage balls were shown to be efficacious in targeting smaller affected areas.

Predicting the Clean Movement Technique in Crossfit® Athletes Using an Optimal Upper-Limb Range of Motion: A Prospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to determine the optimal upper-limb range of motion (ROM) profile for the catch phase of the clean movement (CPCM) and to identify the key ROMs for performing the CPCM in CrossFit® athletes.

METHODS

A prospective cohort study of twenty CrossFit® athletes aged 20-36 years was conducted. Data were collected regarding age, anthropometrics, CrossFit® training experience and upper-limb ROM. The ROM was measured using the ROM-SPORT method. After 7 months, athletes performed a clean movement with a load of 80% one repetition maximum. A Bayesian Student's t-analysis, binary logistic regression analysis and Receiver Operating Characteristic analysis were performed.

RESULTS

The optimal upper-limb ROM profile that predicted correct CPCM performance was 78° in shoulder extension, 173° in shoulder flexion, 107° in shoulder external rotation, 89° in shoulder internal rotation, 153° in elbow flexion, 99° in elbow pronation and 92° in wrist extension (area under the curve ≥ 651; positive predictive value ≥ 80%). Shoulder external rotation, elbow pronation and wrist extension were found to be the most important ROMs for the efficient and safe performance of CPCM (area under the curve ≥ 854; positive predictive value ≥ 85.7%).

CONCLUSION

The upper-limb ROM profile is associated with proper clean performance. Further studies are warranted to determine whether improving flexibility on upper-limb ROM may improve proper clean movement performance.