[This is a guest blog from Robert Schurtman. Robert is currently an intern taking part in the Athletic Lab Coaching Mentorship program. He is a NASM Certified Personal Trainer who has a background in Ultimate Frisbee.]

Myofascial release is a modality that has been around for many years. One variant of it that has gained popularity is self-myofascial release. It has become a popular modality that provides many benefits to athletes and gym goers alike. It’s used in a multitude of sports for different applications, whether that be part of a warm up or cool down. Self-myofascial release, or SMR, is a massage technique that can be done to oneself using a massaging implement such as a lacrosse ball or a foam roller and a person’s own body weight. A person applies pressure to their muscles with their own weight on the massaging tool to relieve tension. While there is still a lot of discourse involving SMR, specifically about the appropriate prescription for it, the benefits of SMR speak for themselves. Along with the more commonly known benefits of increased range of motion (ROM) / flexibility and enhancing recovery, SMR provides even lesser-known benefits as further explained in this post.

How does it work?

Before we get into the benefits, let’s first understand how exactly SMR works. To start, we need some background information about the muscles in the body. Each muscle has two mechanoreceptors that help with contraction and extension of the muscle: the Golgi tendon organ (GTO) and the muscle spindle. The GTO senses changes in tension of the muscle and the muscle spindle senses changes in length. Together, they work to protect the muscle from tearing and over stretching. The basis of SMR is based on the principle of autogenic inhibition. This is the effect of the muscle relaxing due to a high amount of tension being applied to the GTO. With repetitive movement or poor posture, the fascia that surrounds all muscles can stick or adhere to itself creating an adhesion or more commonly known as a “knot,” which is believed to inhibit normal muscle function. It is a common belief that SMR helps to smooth out fascial adhesions; however, this theory comes with skepticism. Recent research has suggested that SMR might not be able to generate enough pressure to break up these adhesions. That being said, SMR still brings benefits to the muscle tissue, such as increased blood circulation and reduced pain perception. To get the most out of SMR, an individual must find the most tender spot, an area with the most muscle hypertonicity or overactive muscle activity, on the muscle tissue and apply tension via bodyweight and massaging implement for 30 seconds. By applying tension to the tender spot or “trigger point,” the GTO senses the increased tension and overrides excessive muscle spindle activity which relaxes the previously mentioned overactive muscle. This, in turn, increases range of motion and returns the muscle to its normal function.

Increase Flexibility and Enhanced Recovery

As mentioned before, increased flexibility and ROM are the most commonly known benefits of SMR. With the inner workings explained above, it’s logical that SMR would increase a person’s flexibility. By stimulating a trigger point and relaxing the muscle spindle, there’s an increase in ROM of said muscle. Many studies have been conducted to further investigate this effect SMR has on muscle tension. A 2024 systematic review of the effects of SMR on athletic performance looked at 20 different studies based on the supposed mobility improvements of SMR (1). Overall, researchers found SMR to have a positive effect on flexibility and ROM. Of the 20 studies reviewed, 13 had found improvements in mobility, specifically lower body mobility. In one study done in 2019 by Gillot et al. (5), researchers wanted to find out the effects of SMR on lower limb flexibility over a 5–7-week period. Thirty male rugby players were divided into three groups to analyze the effects of SMR. One group foam rolled for 20s, another 40s, and the last group was the control group, which did not foam roll, but they cycled at a low intensity for a similar amount of time as the other groups to achieve lower limb activation. After seven weeks, participants were tested on hip flexion and extension. The results showed an increase in hip extension of about 9% for the 20s and 40s groups as well as an increase in hip flexion of about 17% as compared to the control group. Another study conducted by Richman et al. (6) sought to analyze the effects of SMR on flexibility and athletic performance compared to light walking as a warmup modality. Fourteen college women who were former athletes participated in the experiment. The subjects participated in three sessions. The first being a familiarization session, while the other two sessions were used to test the effects of either SMR or light walking on flexibility. Before each session, the athletes performed a general warmup of a five minute jog at their own pace. Each modality was randomly selected for participants with a coin toss. Both groups performed their modality for six minutes, then participated in a sit and reach test for three trials (once after the warmup, after the selected modality, and after a dynamic warmup). The study found that the SMR protocol had an overall increase of 5% flexibility when compared to the initial trial after the general warm up, while those who participated in light walking did not have a significant change in their sit and reach test. These studies further cement the additive effects SMR brings to flexibility and ROM.

In addition to improved flexibility and ROM, SMR has also been shown to decrease the effects of delayed onset muscle soreness, also known as DOMS. Delayed onset muscle soreness is a body reaction that takes place 24 to 72 hours after one has conducted a workout routine. This is due to tiny tears in muscle fibers caused by an intense bout of exercise. The body responds to these tears with increased inflammation, the start of the healing process, causing a feeling of soreness. Foam rolling helps to accelerate the healing process by increasing blood flow to these areas of soreness, allowing for a quickened recovery process (5). In a 2015 literature review by Schroeder et al. (3), nine studies were analyzed to get a better understanding of how SMR can be used as an effective tool for recovery as well as other benefits it may offer. Overall, the review found SMR provided benefits to athlete’s pre exercise and as a recovery tool. While most of the studies focused on performance and ROM, two studies focused on the recovery aspect of SMR. In the first study done by Macdonald et al. (7), researchers analyzed the effects of SMR as a recovery modality after incurring muscle damage from a workout. Twenty male subjects were randomly put in either a foam rolling group or a control group. All participants did 10 sets of 10 reps on back squats to accumulate enough stimulus to enact DOMS. Those in the foam rolling group performed SMR for 20 minutes and had their soreness levels measured at 4 different hour intervals post exercise: 0, 24, 48, 72. Those who participated in the foam rolling group reported a significant decrease in muscle soreness as opposed to the control group. The second study was done by Pearcy et al. (8) who measured how SMR could be used as a recovery tool after an intense bout of exercise. Eight male participants served as both the experimental and control group for two sessions with a 4-week time span between sessions. The same protocol that had been used by Macdonald et al. was used in this study as well as the same analysis by having those who foam rolled perform SMR for 20 minutes and checked in with them at the same four different hour intervals post exercise. They corroborated results found in the Macdonald et al. study that when SMR was used post exercise, the effects of DOMS and pain perception were lessened when compared to those who did not use SMR.

The lesser-known effects of SMR

While a majority of studies on SMR note the benefits it brings to flexibility/ROM and recovery, many other studies have been conducted to demonstrate additional benefits of this modality. A 2014 study done by Peacock et al. (2) examined how adding an acute session of SMR to a warmup improved athletic performance. The subjects, made up of 11 males with previous athletic experience, participated as the control group and the experimental group in two separate protocols that were spaced seven days apart. The first protocol was a dynamic warmup which included a 5 min jog followed by mobility movements such as arm circles and squat jumps. The second protocol consisted of an SMR warmup including a 5-minute jog followed by a variety of SMR techniques and then performed the same mobility movements as the dynamic warm up group (arm circles and squat jumps). After each protocol, subjects were tested on a variety of performance tests such as the pro agility test and vertical jump test. When it came to lower extremity power, the vertical jump and long jump tests showed an increase in performance when SMR was incorporated into the warmup as opposed to a regular dynamic warm up. The regular dynamic warm up group for the vertical jump test scored about 68 cm compared to the group that added SMR to their warm up with a jump height of about 73 cm. Meanwhile, when it came to the long jump test, participants who followed the regular dynamic warm up protocol ended up reaching a distance of about 229 cm. However, after including SMR to their warm up, they increased their distance by about 8 cm. As for agility, the study also found improvements when SMR was added to the warmup, admittedly not as significant as the jump tests. For the pro shuttle test, post dynamic warm up compared to the addition of SMR to the warm up had scores of 4.97 seconds and 4.8 seconds respectively, showing a decrease in time of 0.17 seconds. In addition to researching flexibility, researchers from the aforementioned 2024 systematic review by Martínez-Aranda et al. (1) were also hoping to discover how SMR might have a positive effect on athletic performance. They analyzed 17 studies covering athletic performance, seven dealing with power performance showing noticeable improvements in power development, specifically vertical jumping assessments, and the other 10 studies dealing with strength performance (it should be noted that the 10 studies that looked at strength performance found no notable differences when SMR was applied, but I am focusing on SMR’s effect on power performance). Of the seven studies analyzing the effects of SMR on vertical jump assessments was a 2018 study done by Giovanelli et al. (10). In the study, researchers had participants in three groups: those who performed the test without any SMR protocol, immediately after using SMR, and three hours after an SMR routine. They found an increase in force production for those who completed the test immediately after an SMR routine and three hours after participating in an SMR routine with an overall increase of 8% and 10% respectively. A second study from the same systematic review done by Stroiney et al. (9) compared the effects of SMR and instrument-assisted soft tissue mobilization (IASTM), similar to SMR except an instrument is used by an expert to increase blood flow of the muscle as opposed to being done by oneself. In the study, 49 recreational athletes acted as experimental and control groups in the two sessions that were performed. Before each session, participants warmed up for five minutes on an ergometer bike to ensure readiness to perform the vertical jump assessment. In the first session, athletes performed the assessment with no added modality. Afterwards, each person was randomly assigned either SMR or IASTM to use before the next session. The results showed a significant increase in vertical jump height for those who used SMR (~57cm) as opposed to the IASTM group (~52cm). In addition to improvements in range of motion and recovery, SMR can also benefit performance in agility and lower extremity power.

SMR paired with other modalities

As studies have shown, self-myofascial release on its own is a great modality with a variety of benefits. However, there is an added effectiveness when paired with other modalities, such as static stretching (SS) or superficial heat. Static stretching refers to bringing a muscle to the point of tension and holding the said position for 20-30 seconds, resulting in the relaxation of the muscle. Superficial heat refers to heat being applied to the muscle from an outside source whether that be a heat pack or hot towel. These modalities, while great on their own, have an added effect when paired with SMR. A 2015 study conducted by Jakob Škarabot et al. (4) compared the effects of SS, SMR, and SS+SMR to see which would increase range of motion in ankle flexibility the most, specifically ankle dorsiflexion. Eleven adolescent athletes participated in the study. Each athlete visited the gym to which they were a member, and each performed either SS, SMR, or a combination of the two. Each protocol had participants do three sets of 30s for each muscle worked with a 15s rest between sets. These visits were spaced out by at least 24 hours between sessions. Passive ankle dorsiflexion measurements were taken before each intervention and taken 10, 15, and 20 minutes after the modality the athletes used. The results found an increase in ankle dorsiflexion by 9% when SS and SMR were both used as opposed to a 6% increase with SS alone and no significant increase with SMR alone. The results displayed the synergistic effect of combining the two modalities.

Static stretching isn’t the only modality that brings added effects to SMR, superficial heat can also bring forth additional benefits when paired. A 2019 study done by Oranchuk et al. (11) sought to analyze the effects of foam rolling as well as superficial heat on lower extremity ROM. Twenty-two female collegiate lacrosse and soccer players participated in the experiment and were separated into four distinct groups: foam rolling, superficial heat, foam rolling paired with superficial heat, and a control group. It should be noted that each treatment was performed for a different amount of time. Foam rolling was applied for five minutes, superficial heat was for 10 minutes, and the combined protocol was 15 minutes total. Participants then performed a straight leg test to analyze hamstring and hip mobility. The study’s results showed a 7% increase in mobility with foam rolling alone and a 13% increase when both heat and SMR were used. This again shows the additional benefits one can acquire when pairing SMR with another modality.

Conclusion

While it is a commonly used tool for a warmup and recovery, SMR provides additional benefits to performance in certain activities involving agility and power. Furthermore, SMR can be used in tandem with static stretching and superficial heat for an added effect to recovery and increasing flexibility. With all this being said, there is still much more to discover about SMR. Many questions still remain about this modality such as the proper prescription as well as the best instrument to use, whether it be a foam roller or a massage ball. Even with many uncertainties to self-myofascial release, the known benefits have kept it in the athletic world and remains a common practice among athletes and gym goers alike.

References

  • Martínez-Aranda, Luis Manuel, et al. “Effects of Self-Myofascial Release on Athletes’ Physical Performance: A Systematic Review.” Journal of Functional Morphology and Kinesiology, vol. 9, no. 1, 1 Mar. 2024, p. 20.
  • Peacock, Corey A, et al. “An Acute Bout of Self-Myofascial Release in the Form of Foam Rolling Improves Performance Testing.” International Journal of Exercise Science, vol. 7, no. 3, 2014, pp. 202–211.
  • Schroeder, Allison N., and Thomas M. Best. “Is Self Myofascial Release an Effective Preexercise and Recovery Strategy? A Literature Review.” Current Sports Medicine Reports, vol. 14, no. 3, 2015, pp. 200–208.
  • Škarabot, Jakob, et al. “Comparing the Effects of Self-Myofascial Release with Static Stretching on Ankle Range-of-Motion in Adolescent Athletes.” International Journal of Sports Physical Therapy, vol. 10, no. 2, 2015, pp. 203–12.
  • Guillot, Aymeric, et al. “Foam Rolling and Joint Distraction with Elastic Band Training Performed for 5-7 Weeks Respectively Improve Lower Limb Flexibility.” Journal of Sports Science & Medicine, vol. 18, no. 1, 11 Feb. 2019, pp. 160–171.
  • Richman, Erick D., et al. “Combined Effects of Self-Myofascial Release and Dynamic Stretching on Range of Motion, Jump, Sprint, and Agility Performance.” Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, vol. 33, no. 7, June 2018, p. 1.
  • MacDonald, Graham Z., et al. “Foam Rolling as a Recovery Tool after an Intense Bout of Physical Activity.” Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, vol. 46, no. 1, Jan. 2014, pp. 131–142.
  • Pearcey, Gregory E. P., et al. “Foam Rolling for Delayed-Onset Muscle Soreness and Recovery of Dynamic Performance Measures.” Journal of Athletic Training, vol. 50, no. 1, Jan. 2015, pp. 5–13.
  • Stroiney, Debra A., et al. “Examination of Self-Myofascial Release vs. Instrument-Assisted Soft-Tissue Mobilization Techniques on Vertical and Horizontal Power in Recreational Athletes.” Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, vol. 34, no. 1, Jan. 2020, pp. 79–88.
  • Giovanelli, Nicola, et al. “Short-Term Effects of Rolling Massage on Energy Cost of Running and Power of the Lower Limbs.” International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance, vol. 13, no. 10, 1 Nov. 2018, pp. 1337–1343, Accessed 14 Nov. 2021.
  • Oranchuk, Dustin J., et al. “Superficial Heat Administration and Foam Rolling Increase Hamstring Flexibility Acutely; with Amplifying Effects.” Physical Therapy in Sport, vol. 40, Nov. 2019, pp. 213–217.