Massage, Compression and Foam Rolling
These reliably make you feel less sore, and do considerably less for measured performance. Compression means wearing compression garments after training.
- Pain that is sharp, localized or worsening: see a clinician
How to do it
What the evidence says
This practice is one way to carry out what the sources on the concept entry (phys.recovery.manual-modalities-perception-vs-function) studied: massage, compression, foam rolling and related recovery modalities. Dupuy 2018 (meta-analysis) concludes that massage seems to be the most effective method for reducing delayed-onset soreness and perceived fatigue; Leabeater 2022 (systematic review) reports that compression garments consistently lower muscle soreness and benefit subsequent endurance and resistance bouts; Wiewelhove 2019 (meta-analysis) reports small reductions in performance loss and pain with foam rolling as a recovery strategy. The full account, source by source, is on the concept entry this practice links to (phys.recovery.manual-modalities-perception-vs-function).
- Misconception: 'These speed up recovery of strength.' Effects concentrate on soreness and perception.
- Does not treat injury
- Does not break down scar tissue or adhesions
- Agreement
- Direction recorded for 0 of 11 sources; not yet recorded for the rest.
- The claim's outcome
- Outcome not yet recorded
- Certainty
- No source states a certainty rating.
What each source measured and concluded (11)
- What it measured
- Impact of recovery techniques on DOMS, perceived fatigue, muscle damage, and inflammatory markers
- How it was read
- screened only, not extracted
- What the review says it includes
- Systematic review with meta-analysis
- Studies and participants, as stated
- 99 studies
- What it measured
- Muscle recovery and delayed onset muscle soreness
- How it was read
- screened only, not extracted
- What the review says it includes
- Systematic review
- Studies and participants, as stated
- 9 studies
- What it measured
- Physiological, physical, neuromuscular, biomechanical, and perceptual outcomes
- How it was read
- screened only, not extracted
- What the review says it includes
- Systematic review (PRISMA-P)
- Studies and participants, as stated
- 160 articles, 2530 participants
- What it measured
- Total Quality Recovery, perceived muscle soreness, jump, agility, sprint, flexibility at 24h post-training
- How it was read
- screened only, not extracted
- What it measured
- Sprint, jump, and strength performance; flexibility; muscle pain
- How it was read
- screened only, not extracted
- What the review says it includes
- Meta-analysis
- Studies and participants, as stated
- 21 studies (14 pre-rolling, 7 post-rolling)
- What it measured
- Neuromuscular performance (CMJ, MVC), muscle soreness (DOMS), and biochemical markers (CK) after percussive therapy
- How it was read
- screened only, not extracted
- What the review says it includes
- Systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs (PRISMA; RoB2, PEDro, GRADE)
- Studies and participants, as stated
- 12 RCTs
- What it measured
- Recovery following exercise-induced muscle damage (muscle soreness, strength loss)
- How it was read
- screened only, not extracted
- What the review says it includes
- Systematic review and meta-analysis
- Studies and participants, as stated
- 18 trials (13 pooled); all high risk of bias
- What it measured
- Exercise performance and physiological recovery variables
- How it was read
- screened only, not extracted
- What the review says it includes
- Meta-analysis (PRISMA)
- Studies and participants, as stated
- 15 articles
- What it measured
- Muscle performance (repetitions, time to exhaustion) and creatine kinase (muscle damage risk)
- How it was read
- screened only, not extracted
- What the review says it includes
- Systematic review with meta-analysis of RCTs
- Studies and participants, as stated
- 16 RCTs (13 of acceptable quality analyzed)
- What it measured
- Athletic performance, metabolic recovery, physiological responses (post-recovery blood lactate)
- How it was read
- screened only, not extracted
- What the review says it includes
- Systematic review and meta-analysis
- Studies and participants, as stated
- 11 studies eligible; 6 in meta-analysis
- What it measured
- Comparison of cold-water immersion (CWI) vs body cryotherapy (BC) on DOMS and jump performance
- How it was read
- screened only, not extracted
- What the review says it includes
- Systematic review and meta-analysis (RCTs)
- Studies and participants, as stated
- 13 RCTs, 214 participants
Every source below is shown with its study design and links to the original study. This is the audit trail.