The Effects of Soft Tissue Flossing on Hamstring Range of Motion and Lower Extremity Power
# Background Flossing includes wrapping a specialized latex band around a muscle group providing compression, partially occluding blood flow, followed by performing exercises. This is hypothesized to improve flexibility by dissipating myofascial adhesions; however, research is lacking. # Objectiv...
Guardado en:
| Autores principales: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Formato: | article |
| Lenguaje: | EN |
| Publicado: |
North American Sports Medicine Institute
2021
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | https://doaj.org/article/5be92557712d4b0c81404912f7d7c66c |
| Etiquetas: |
Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
|
| Sumario: | # Background
Flossing includes wrapping a specialized latex band around a muscle group providing compression, partially occluding blood flow, followed by performing exercises. This is hypothesized to improve flexibility by dissipating myofascial adhesions; however, research is lacking.
# Objective
To determine the effect of the application of a floss band to the thigh on hamstring flexibility and lower extremity power.
# Design
Crossover Study
# Setting
Exercise Physiology Laboratory.
# Participants
Twenty-one recreationally active individuals (8 male, 13 female; age = 22.62±2.99 years; height = 171.52±9.08 cm; mass = 73.57±11.37 kg).
# Methods
Three counterbalanced interventions were studied during body weight squats, lunges, and hamstring curls (without resistance): floss, sham, and control. The floss treatment included wrapping the Rogue Wide Voodoo Floss Band™ from the proximal knee to the gluteal fold at a pressure of 140 to 200 mmHg. The sham treatment included wrapping the same band in the same location with less pressure (10 to 40 mmHg) while the control treatment did not include floss band application. Hip flexion range of motion, via the straight leg raise, and power (single-leg vertical jump) were compared from pre-test to post-test using a 3x2 repeated measures ANOVA.
# Results
There was a significant interaction between time and session for hamstring flexibility (F~(2,40)~=17.54, *p*<0.001, η^2^=0.47). Post hoc tests showed significant differences between pre- (86.14±8.06 degrees) and post-test (90.81±7.69 degrees) for the floss session (*p*<0.001, Mean Difference=4.67, CI~95~=3.35-5.98) and between pre- (87.67±7.51 degrees) and post-test (89.86±7.88 degrees) for the sham session (*p*=0.001, Mean Difference=2.19, CI~95~=0.98-3.40). There were no significant interactions for jump power (F~(2,40)~=1.82, *P*=0.18, η^2^=0.08, 1-β=0.36).
# Conclusions
Flossing treatment increased hamstring flexibility more than the sham session without affecting lower body power. Flossing could be beneficial when treatment or performance preparation goals are increased flexibility without decreased power. Future studies should continue to examine the clinical effectiveness of flossing on an injured population. |
|---|