A Dose-Response Relationship Between Myofascial Release & Anaerobic Power Output in Active College-Aged Males

Issue: Vol. 5 No. 2

Published by Journal of Fitness Research, August 2016. Volume 5.2

Tags: Pre-exercise , Warm-up , Fascial Manipulation , Wingate , Foam Rolling

Download PDF Version »

  1. Alexander Hansen
    University-Wisconsin Eau Claire, Department of Kinesiology
  2. Nicholas M Beltz
    University of New Mexico, Department of Health, Exercise & Sports Sciences
  3. Jeffrey Janot (Corresponding Author)
    University-Wisconsin Eau Claire, Department of Kinesiologyrn105 Garfield Avenue Box #4004rnEau Claire, WI 54702rn715-836-5333rnjanotjm@uwec.edu rn
  4. Alexander Martenson
    University-Wisconsin Eau Claire, Department of Kinesiology
  5. Arick Siegmann
    University-Wisconsin Eau Claire, Department of Kinesiology
  6. Anthony Jagielo
    University-Wisconsin Eau Claire, Department of Kinesiology
  7. Andrew Erdmann
    University-Wisconsin Eau Claire, Department of Kinesiology
  8. Matthew Wiggins
    University-Wisconsin Eau Claire, Department of Kinesiology


Introduction: The purpose of this study was to determine the dose response-relationship exists between myofascial release (MFR) and anaerobic power output using a self-MFR protocol of varying durations prior to an anaerobic power test. 

Methods: This study included 19 college-aged males (Ht: 180.26 ± 1.50 cm, Wt:  82.57 ± 15.20 kg, Age:  20.58 ± 1.08) from a Midwestern University, all classified as healthy and physically active.  A single blinded, randomised design was utilised where the participants performed a Wingate test following four different pre-exercise conditions: control, 30-sec, 60-sec, and 90-sec of self-MFR.  Participants completed 30-sec Wingate tests following each pre-exercise condition to assess anaerobic power.

Results: No significant differences were found between control, 30-sec, 60-sec and 90-sec in terms of absolute peak power output (1048.40±204.88W, 1050.68±169.11W, 1043.16±186.31W, and 1047.79±195.21W); minimum power output (5.52±0.80W/kg, 5.70±0.97W/kg, 5.49±0.92W/kg, and 5.52±0.66W/kg); average power output (9.03±0.73W/kg, 9.09±0.77W/kg, 9.07±0.69W/kg, and 9.11±0.67W/kg); and percent power drop (56.50±6.23%, 54.96±6.67%, 56.83±6.49%, and 56.43±4.62%). 

Discussion: The main finding of this current study is that MFR targeting the fascia in the lower extremities of active college-aged males will not significantly impact anaerobic power output in a positive or negative manner.  There may be more effective methods to increase anaerobic power output through the use of a warm-up routine other than MFR.

Conclusion: The main finding of this study was that the implementation of MFR for increments of 30, 60, or 90 seconds did not significantly alter the anaerobic power output in healthy, active college-age males. 

Practical Applications: MFR should be avoided as a pre-exercise warm-up where the aim is to increase the body’s performance during exercise. Instead, MFR may be considered for its long-term use to improve fascial health. Time available should be considered when considering using MFR as a warm-up. 

Download PDF Version »

Also In This Issue

« Back to Articles

Article Title

A Dose-Response Relationship Between Myofascial Release & Anaerobic Power Output in Active College-Aged Males

Journal Title

Journal of Fitness Research Volume 5.2

Online Publication Date

August 2016

Author Names

Alexander Hansen
Nicholas M Beltz
Jeffrey Janot (Corresponding Author)
Alexander Martenson
Arick Siegmann
Anthony Jagielo
Andrew Erdmann
Matthew Wiggins
  1. Decoster, L., Cleland, J., Altieri, C. & Russell, P. (2005). The effects of hamstring stretching on range of motion: a systematic literature review. Journal of Orthopedtic and Sport Physical Therapy, 35: 377-387.
  2. Kay, A. & Blazevich, A. (2012). Effect of acute static stretch on maximal muscle performance: A systematic review. Medicine and Science in Sport and Exercise, 44: 154-164.
  3. Simic, L., Sarabon, N., & Markovic, G. (2013). Does pre-exercise static stretching inhibit maximal muscle performance?  A meta-analytical review. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in Sports, 23: 131-148.
  4. Schleip, R., Klinger, W., & Lehmann-Horn, F. (2005). Active fascial contractility: Fascia may be able to contract in a smooth muscle-like manner and thereby influence musculoskeletal dynamics. Medical Hypotheses, 65: 273-277.
  5. Schleip, R., & Müller, D. (2013). Training principles for fascial connective tissues: scientific foundation and suggested practical applications.  Journal Bodyweight and Movement Therapies,17: 103-113.
  6. Jarvinen, T., Jozsa, L., Kannus, P., Jarvinen, T, Jarvinen, M. (2002). Organization and distribution of intramuscular connective tissue in normal and immobilized skeletal muscles. An immnohistochemical, polarization and scanning electron microscopic study. Journal Muscle Research and Cell Mobility, 23: 245-254.
  7. Cantu, R., Grodin, A., & Stanborough, R. (2012). Myofascial Manipulation: Theory and Clinical Application. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
  8. Spector, M. (2002). Musculoskeletal connective tissue cells with muscle: Expression of muscle actin in and contraction of fibroblasts, chondrocytes, and osteoblasts.  Wound Repair Regeneration, 9 (1): 11-18.
  9. Arroyo-Morales, M., Olea, N., Martinez, M., Moreno-Lorenzo, C., Diaz-Rodriguez, L., & Hidalgo-Lozano, A. (2008). Effects of myofascial release after high-intensity exercise: A randomized clinical trial.  Journal of Manipulative Physiological Therapeutics, 31 (3): 217-223.
  10. Janot, J., Malin, B., Cook, R., Hagenbucher, J., Draeger, A., Jordan, M., & Quinn, E. (2013). Effects of self myofascial release and static stretching on anaerobic power output.  Journal of Fitness Research, 2 (1): 41-51.
  11. Healey, K., Hatlfield, D., Blanpied, P., Dorfman., & Riebe, D. (2014). The effects of myofascial release with foam rolling on performance. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 28 (1): 61-68.
  12. MacDonald, G., Penney, M., Mullaley, M., Cuconato, A., Drake, C., Behm, D., & Button, D. (2013). An acute bout of self-myofascial release increases range of motion without a subsequent decrease in muscle activation or force. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 27 (3): 812-821.
  13. Inbar, O., Bar-Or, O., & Skinner, J.S. (1996). The Wingate Anaerobic Test. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
  14. Boesel, C., Caslavka. B., Ferestad. R., Gytri. H., & Melby, T. (2012).  The effects of myofascial release and dynamic warm-up on exercise performance. (2012).  Journal of Undergraduate Kinesiology Research, 7 (2): 34-42.
  15. Sullivan, K., Silvey, D., Button, D., Behm, D. (2013). Roller-massager application to the hamstrings increases sit-and-reach range of motion within five to ten seconds without performance impairments. International Journal of Sports Physical Therapy, 8 (3): 228-236.
  16. Garber, C., Blissmer, B., Deschenes, M., Franklin, B., Lamonte, M., Lee, I., Nieman, D., & Swain, D. (2011). Quantity and quality of exercise for developing and maintaining cardiorespiratory, musculoskeletal, and neuromotor fitness in apparently healthy adults: guidance for prescribing exercise. Medicine and Science in Sport and Exercise, 43 (7): 1334-1359.
  17. Barnes, M. (1997). The basic science of myofascial release: morphologic change in connective tissue. Journal of Bodyweight and Movement Therapies, 1 (4): 231-236.
  18. Weerapong, P., Hume, P., & Kol, G. (2005). The mechanisms of massage and effects on performance, muscle recovery and injury prevention. Sports Medicine, 35 (3): 235-256.
  19. Benetazzo, L., Bizzego, A., De Caro, R., Frigo, G., Guidolin, D., Stecco, C. (2011). 3D reconstruction of the cural and thoracolumbar fasciae. Surgical and Radiologic Anatatomy, 33: 855-862.
  20. Stone, JA.(2000) Myofascial Release, Athletic Therapies Today 5: 34-35.
No citations available


Blog comments powered by Disqus