Does the type of foam roller influence the recovery rate, thermal response and DOMS prevention?

Abstract

PurposeSupporting post-exercise recovery requires choosing not only the right treatment but also the equipment, in which the impact is not always clear. The study aimed to determine the effect of foam rolling on the rate of lactate removal and DOMS prevention and whether the type of foam roller is effective in the context of post-exercise recovery.MethodsThis randomized trial enrolled 33 active healthy males divided into three groups of eleven individuals: foam rolling with a smooth (STH) or grid roller (GRID) or passive recovery (PAS). All the participants performed full squat jumps for one minute. Examination took place at rest (thermal imaging of skin temperature–[Tsk] and blood lactate–[LA]), immediately following exercise (Tsk & LA), immediately after recovery treatment (Tsk) and after 30 minutes of rest (Tsk & LA). Their pain levels were assessed using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) 24, 48, 72, and 96 hours after exercise.ResultsThe magnitude of lactate decrease depended on the type of recovery used. In the PAS group, the decrease in lactate concentration by 2.65 mmol/L following a half-hour rest was significantly lower than that in the other groups (STH vs. PAS p = 0.042 / GRID vs. PAS p = 0.025). For thermal responses, significant differences between both experimental groups were noted only 30 minutes after exercise. A significant decrease in pain in the STH group occurred between 48 and 96 hours, while the GRID group showed a systematic significant decrease in VAS values in subsequent measurements. Changes in VAS values in subsequent measurements in the PAS group were not statistically significant (p>0.05).ConclusionsFoam rolling seems to be effective for enhancing lactate clearance and counteracting DOMS, but the type of foam roller does not seem to influence the recovery rate.