Acute Comparative Effect of Foam Rolling and Static Stretching on Range of Motion in Rowers

Empreu sempre aquest identificador per citar o enllaçar aquest ítem http://hdl.handle.net/10045/113823
Información del item - Informació de l'item - Item information
Títol: Acute Comparative Effect of Foam Rolling and Static Stretching on Range of Motion in Rowers
Autors: Penichet-Tomás, Alfonso | Pueo, Basilio | Abad-Lopez, Marta | Jimenez-Olmedo, Jose Manuel
Grups d'investigació o GITE: Research in Physical Education, Fitness and Performance (RIPEFAP)
Centre, Departament o Servei: Universidad de Alicante. Departamento de Didáctica General y Didácticas Específicas
Paraules clau: Traditional rowing | Flexibility | Sports | Performance
Àrees de coneixement: Educación Física y Deportiva
Data de publicació: 24-de març-2021
Editor: MDPI
Citació bibliogràfica: Penichet-Tomas A, Pueo B, Abad-Lopez M, Jimenez-Olmedo JM. Acute Comparative Effect of Foam Rolling and Static Stretching on Range of Motion in Rowers. Sustainability. 2021; 13(7):3631. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13073631
Resum: Rowers’ anthropometric characteristics and flexibility are fundamental to increase stroke amplitude and optimize power transfer. The aim of the present study was to analyze the effect of foam rolling and static stretching on the range of motion over time. Eight university rowers (24.8 ± 3.4 yrs., height 182.3 ± 6.5 cm, body mass 79.3 ± 4.6 kg) participated in an alternating treatment design study with two-way repeated measures ANOVA. The sit and reach test was used to measure the range of motion. Both in the foam rolling and in the static stretching method, a pre-test (T0), a post-test (T1), and a post-15-min test (T2) were performed. A significant effect was observed on the range of motion over time (p < 0.001), but not for time x method interaction (p = 0.680). Significant differences were found between T0 and T1 with foam rolling and static stretching (p < 0.001, d = 0.4); p < 0.001, d = 0.6). The differences between T0 and T2 were also significant with both methods (p = 0.001, d = 0.4; p < 0.001, d = 0.4). However, no significant difference was observed between T1 and T2 (p = 1.000, d = 0.1; p = 0.089, d = 0.2). Foam roller and static stretching seem to be effective methods to improve the range of motion but there seems to be no differences between them.
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/10045/113823
ISSN: 2071-1050
DOI: 10.3390/su13073631
Idioma: eng
Tipus: info:eu-repo/semantics/article
Drets: © 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Revisió científica: si
Versió de l'editor: https://doi.org/10.3390/su13073631
Apareix a la col·lecció: INV - SCAPE - Artículos de Revistas
INV - HEALTH-TECH - Artículos de Revistas

Arxius per aquest ítem:
Arxius per aquest ítem:
Arxiu Descripció Tamany Format  
ThumbnailPenichet-Tomas_etal_2021_Sustainability.pdf2,06 MBAdobe PDFObrir Vista prèvia


Aquest ítem està subjecte a una llicència de Creative Commons Llicència Creative Commons Creative Commons