Scholarlink

Background <p>Tissue flossing and mobilization with movement (MWM) have been used to improve ankle dorsiflexion range of motion (ROM), vertical jump, gait, and balance in athletes after sports injuries or to increase sports performance. However, direct comparisons between tissue flossing and MWM in recreationally active, healthy young adults remain limited. This study aimed to compare the effects of tissue flossing and MWM on ankle ROM, jump, gait, and balance in recreationally active young adults. The secondary aim was to compare the perceived comfort level between interventions.</p> Methods <p>This crossover randomized controlled study included three groups: Flossing, MWM, and control. The interventions were administered with a one-week interval between sessions. The tissue flossing and the MWM were applied to both ankles. No intervention was performed in the control group. All measurements were conducted both before and after the interventions. Passive and active ankle dorsiflexion ROM was evaluated using ImageJ software and the Weight-Bearing Lunge Test, respectively. The BTS G-Walk IMU sensor was used for counter-movement jump, gait, and balance assessments.</p> Results <p>Two-way repeated-measures ANOVA revealed significant group × time interaction effects for passive ankle dorsiflexion ROM and jump height (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.05), with the MWM group showing greater improvements than the flossing and control groups. Active ankle dorsiflexion ROM also showed a significant interaction effect (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.05), where both the MWM and flossing groups improved compared to the control group. Within-group comparisons showed no improvement in the control group (<i>p</i> &gt; 0.05). The MWM group demonstrated significant gains in both active and passive dorsiflexion ROM and vertical jump height (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.05), whereas the flossing group improved only in active dorsiflexion ROM (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.05). The MWM was also perceived as more comfortable than flossing (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.05).</p> Conclusions <p>MWM demonstrated advantages in specific outcomes (passive ROM, jump height, comfort) compared to flossing in the acute setting.</p> Trial registration <p>NCT06392880, 04/26/2024 (retrospectively registered), Link https//clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06392880.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Comparison of tissue flossing and mobilization with movement effects on motion, vertical jump, gait, and balance

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年1月19日

查看全文
  • Erdal Horata,
  • Emel Taşvuran Horata,
  • Arife Nur Kanyilmaz,
  • Halil İbrahim Solak

摘要

Background

Tissue flossing and mobilization with movement (MWM) have been used to improve ankle dorsiflexion range of motion (ROM), vertical jump, gait, and balance in athletes after sports injuries or to increase sports performance. However, direct comparisons between tissue flossing and MWM in recreationally active, healthy young adults remain limited. This study aimed to compare the effects of tissue flossing and MWM on ankle ROM, jump, gait, and balance in recreationally active young adults. The secondary aim was to compare the perceived comfort level between interventions.

Methods

This crossover randomized controlled study included three groups: Flossing, MWM, and control. The interventions were administered with a one-week interval between sessions. The tissue flossing and the MWM were applied to both ankles. No intervention was performed in the control group. All measurements were conducted both before and after the interventions. Passive and active ankle dorsiflexion ROM was evaluated using ImageJ software and the Weight-Bearing Lunge Test, respectively. The BTS G-Walk IMU sensor was used for counter-movement jump, gait, and balance assessments.

Results

Two-way repeated-measures ANOVA revealed significant group × time interaction effects for passive ankle dorsiflexion ROM and jump height (p < 0.05), with the MWM group showing greater improvements than the flossing and control groups. Active ankle dorsiflexion ROM also showed a significant interaction effect (p < 0.05), where both the MWM and flossing groups improved compared to the control group. Within-group comparisons showed no improvement in the control group (p > 0.05). The MWM group demonstrated significant gains in both active and passive dorsiflexion ROM and vertical jump height (p < 0.05), whereas the flossing group improved only in active dorsiflexion ROM (p < 0.05). The MWM was also perceived as more comfortable than flossing (p < 0.05).

Conclusions

MWM demonstrated advantages in specific outcomes (passive ROM, jump height, comfort) compared to flossing in the acute setting.

Trial registration

NCT06392880, 04/26/2024 (retrospectively registered), Link https//clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06392880.