Frontiers in physiology · 2026
Acute effects of foam rolling on jump performance and neuromuscular responses following resistance exercise.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Rodoplu Coşkun, Fischer Josef, Arabacı Mert, Yıldırım Yahya, Topçu Hüseyin, Şekir Ufuk, Konrad Andreas
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: A single bout of high-load resistance exercise can induce acute neuromuscular fatigue, necessitating effective recovery strategies to maintain explosive performance. However, the effects of foam rolling (FR) on vertical and horizontal jump performance and muscle excitation following fatiguing resistance exercise remain unclear. This study examined the acute effects of FR compared with passive recovery (PR) on vertical and horizontal jump performance and lower-extremity muscle excitation following a fatiguing resistance exercise protocol.
METHODS: Thirty-one healthy, physically active men (age: 21.6 ± 1.3 years; body mass: 75.3 ± 10.3 kg; height: 180.6 ± 7.2 cm) completed a randomized crossover trial comparing FR and PR. Measurements were obtained at pre-test, immediately after exercise (mid-test), and after an 8-min recovery intervention (post-test). Jump performance was assessed using the countermovement jump (CMJ) and single-leg hop for distance (SLHD), while surface electromyography was recorded from the quadriceps, hamstrings, and gastrocnemius muscles during both tasks.
RESULTS: A significant condition × time interaction was observed for CMJ and SLHD performance (p<.05; η p 2 = .216 - .256 ). Compared with PR, the FR condition showed improvements in CMJ (Δ = 6.23%; p = .004) and SLHD performance (Δ = 10.27%; p<.001) from mid-test to post-test. No significant condition × time interaction was found for normalized muscle excitation (p >.05; η p 2 = .002 - .070 ), although time-dependent changes were observed only in the rectus femoris and gastrocnemius muscles during the SLHD test (p<.05; η p 2 = .187 - .251 ).
CONCLUSION: These findings indicate that FR facilitated the post-exercise restoration of vertical jump performance and produced an acute enhancement in horizontal jump performance following resistance exercise, yet the performance benefits were not accompanied by measurable changes in normalized muscle excitation. The results underscore the potential of FR as a practical recovery tool for improving functional performance, while the underlying physiological mechanisms remain uncertain.
METHODS: Thirty-one healthy, physically active men (age: 21.6 ± 1.3 years; body mass: 75.3 ± 10.3 kg; height: 180.6 ± 7.2 cm) completed a randomized crossover trial comparing FR and PR. Measurements were obtained at pre-test, immediately after exercise (mid-test), and after an 8-min recovery intervention (post-test). Jump performance was assessed using the countermovement jump (CMJ) and single-leg hop for distance (SLHD), while surface electromyography was recorded from the quadriceps, hamstrings, and gastrocnemius muscles during both tasks.
RESULTS: A significant condition × time interaction was observed for CMJ and SLHD performance (p<.05; η p 2 = .216 - .256 ). Compared with PR, the FR condition showed improvements in CMJ (Δ = 6.23%; p = .004) and SLHD performance (Δ = 10.27%; p<.001) from mid-test to post-test. No significant condition × time interaction was found for normalized muscle excitation (p >.05; η p 2 = .002 - .070 ), although time-dependent changes were observed only in the rectus femoris and gastrocnemius muscles during the SLHD test (p<.05; η p 2 = .187 - .251 ).
CONCLUSION: These findings indicate that FR facilitated the post-exercise restoration of vertical jump performance and produced an acute enhancement in horizontal jump performance following resistance exercise, yet the performance benefits were not accompanied by measurable changes in normalized muscle excitation. The results underscore the potential of FR as a practical recovery tool for improving functional performance, while the underlying physiological mechanisms remain uncertain.