Mobility and MFR

Foam rollers, balls and ‘mobility sessions’ have become a familiar part of the warm-up and cool-down. They are advertised as a way to ‘break up fascial adhesions’ and permanently improve mobility. The editorial team looked into what actually happens during self-massage, which effects studies confirm, and how to rationally combine MFR, stretching and strength training.

Mobility, flexibility and fascia: basic concepts

Flexibility is the passive range of motion in a joint: how far a limb can be moved if you help yourself with your hands or body weight. Mobility is a broader concept: it is the ability to actively perform a movement through the required range under muscular control. A person can have good flexibility but poor mobility if they lack strength in the end positions.

For an athlete it is precisely mobility that matters. A weightlifter needs range in the hip and ankle joints in a deep squat, a swimmer in the shoulders, a runner in the hips. And in each case it must be combined with stability and control, otherwise excessive mobility itself becomes a risk factor.

Fascia is connective tissue that surrounds muscles, groups of muscles and organs, forming a continuous network. It contains many nerve endings, in particular mechanoreceptors. Over the last two decades fascia has become a popular object of research, and along with this many simplified marketing claims have appeared.

Myofascial release (MFR) is the general name for techniques of pressure and gliding over soft tissues. It can be performed by a specialist manually or independently with the help of rollers, balls, sticks and percussion massagers. It is precisely self-myofascial release (SMR) that is most often associated with ‘rolling’.

How MFR really works

The popular explanation claims that the roller ‘stretches’ or ‘breaks up the adhesions’ of the fascia. Mathematical modelling by Chaudhry and co-authors (2008) showed that substantial deformation of dense fasciae, for example the fascia lata of the thigh, requires forces considerably greater than those possible with ordinary manual therapy. So mechanically ‘reworking’ fascia in a few minutes on a roller is practically impossible.

The narrative review by Behm and Wilke (2019) with the telling title ‘Do self-myofascial release devices release myofascia?’ concluded that the main effects of rolling are probably connected not with structural changes in the tissues but with the nervous system: a change in pain sensitivity, stretch tolerance and tone.

The idea of the neurophysiological nature of the effects had earlier been formulated by Schleip (2003): pressure on the tissues activates the mechanoreceptors of the fascia, which through the nervous system changes the tone of the muscles and the sensations in them. This can explain why the effect of MFR appears quickly and passes just as quickly.

The practical consequence is important: MFR does not ‘fix’ the tissues permanently. It temporarily opens a ‘window’ of better mobility and comfort, which should be used for a quality warm-up or for working on technique in the new range.

What the studies prove

The systematic review by Cheatham and co-authors (2015) showed that rolling before a load briefly increases the range of motion in the joints and, unlike prolonged static stretching, usually does not reduce strength or speed indicators. After a load rolling can reduce muscle pain.

The meta-analysis by Wiewelhove and co-authors (2019) refined these conclusions. Rolling before training gave a small improvement in sprint indicators and flexibility, and rolling after a load a small reduction in the feeling of muscle pain. The authors emphasised that the effects are generally small and matter more for well-being than for results.

The question of the optimal parameters remains unresolved: duration, pressure, density of the roller, number of sets. Different studies use different protocols, so there are no precise recommendations. Most works used from 30 seconds to 2 minutes per muscle group.

So MFR is a useful but not a magical tool. It fits well into the warm-up and cool-down, but does not replace systematic work on mobility.

Stretching and strength exercises for mobility

Static stretching was for a long time considered a mandatory part of the warm-up, and then was almost ‘banned’ over fears that it reduces strength. The review by Behm and Chaouachi (2011) showed that a noticeable reduction in strength indicators is associated mainly with long holds — over 60 seconds per muscle group — whereas short holds combined with a dynamic warm-up have little effect on the result.

Dynamic stretching — controlled movements through an increasing range — is better suited for the warm-up before speed and strength work. It prepares the joints and nervous system without reducing explosive qualities.

A long-term gain in flexibility requires regularity: weeks and months of stretching. Interestingly, strength training through a full range also improves mobility. The meta-analysis by Afonso and co-authors (2021) found no significant difference between strength training and stretching in terms of the gain in range of motion.

This is especially important for mobility: exercises through a full range with weight develop not only flexibility but also strength in the end positions — that is, precisely the active mobility that is needed in sport.

• Rolling:a quick temporary gain in range, reduction of pain.
• Dynamic stretching:a warm-up before speed and strength work.
• Static stretching:long-term flexibility, mainly outside the main training session.
• Strength exercises through a full range:flexibility plus strength and control in the end positions.

In practice: how to build a session

Before training a sensible sequence is as follows: a general warm-up of 5–10 minutes, brief rolling of problem areas (30–60 seconds per group), dynamic stretching and mobility exercises, and then specific ramp-up sets. Rolling here is needed to ‘open up’ the range for quality technique.

After training or on rest days you can devote more time to rolling and static stretching. This helps to relax, reduce the feeling of stiffness and maintain flexibility in the long term.

The pressure during rolling should be noticeable but not unbearable. Severe pain makes the muscles reflexively tense, which is contrary to the goal. Avoid direct pressure on bones, joints, the lower-back area along the spine, and also areas with visible veins.

Percussion massagers work on a similar principle and subjectively appeal to many. There are fewer data on them than on rollers, but those available indicate similar short-term effects on range of motion and pain.

Contraindications to MFR are fresh injuries in the area of application, deep vein thrombosis, pronounced varicose veins, blood-clotting disorders, osteoporosis with a risk of fractures, inflammatory skin diseases and acute infections. In case of doubt it is worth consulting a doctor or a physical therapist.

Editorial conclusions

Mobility is an active, controlled range of motion, and its development requires not only stretching but also strength in the end positions.

MFR and rolling briefly improve mobility and reduce pain without reducing strength indicators, but do not ‘break up the adhesions’ of the fascia: their effects are mainly neurophysiological and temporary.

The best strategy is to combine brief rolling and dynamic stretching in the warm-up with regular static stretching and strength exercises through a full range.

We also advise reading our articles on massage for recovery, active recovery and the warm-up before strength training.

References

1. Wiewelhove T, Döweling A, Schneider C, et al. A meta-analysis of the effects of foam rolling on performance and recovery. Front Physiol. 2019;10:376.
2. Cheatham SW, Kolber MJ, Cain M, Lee M. The effects of self-myofascial release using a foam roll or roller massager on joint range of motion, muscle recovery, and performance: a systematic review. Int J Sports Phys Ther. 2015;10(6):827–838.
3. Behm DG, Wilke J. Do self-myofascial release devices release myofascia? Rolling mechanisms: a narrative review. Sports Med. 2019;49(8):1173–1181.
4. Chaudhry H, Schleip R, Ji Z, et al. Three-dimensional mathematical model for deformation of human fasciae in manual therapy. J Am Osteopath Assoc. 2008;108(8):379–390.
5. Schleip R. Fascial plasticity – a new neurobiological explanation: Part 1. J Bodyw Mov Ther. 2003;7(1):11–19.
6. Behm DG, Chaouachi A. A review of the acute effects of static and dynamic stretching on performance. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2011;111(11):2633–2651.
7. Afonso J, Ramirez-Campillo R, Moscão J, et al. Strength training versus stretching for improving range of motion: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Healthcare (Basel). 2021;9(4):427.