Use of Topical Analgesic and Rolling Alone or in Combination Does Not Increase Flexibility, Pain Pressure Threshold, and Fatigue Endurance—A Repeated-Measures Randomized, Within-Subjects, Exploratory Study

Background: Prior studies have reported an increase in range of motion (ROM) and pain pressure thresholds (PPT) with self-massage using foam rollers and roller massagers. A possible mechanism for the increased ROM is the increase in stretch (pain) threshold. The effects of the use of a topical analgesic alone or in combination with rolling may provide additional benefits for ROM and PPT and improve the ability to tolerate discomfort during a fatiguing protocol. Purpose: The purpose of this study is to investigate the effect of the use of a topical analgesic alone or a roller massager alone and a combination of both on ROM, PPT, and performance in a fatiguing protocol. Design: This study used a repeated-measures, randomized, within-subjects design. Methods: Sixteen healthy, active male participants (age range, 18–27 years) free from musculoskeletal injuries participated in the study that included 5 conditions, namely, control, placebo gel, topical analgesic gel, rolling and placebo gel, and rolling and topical analgesic gel. All sessions involved 2 ROM and PPT pretests separated by 5 min. Further, after a 20-min recovery period, 2 posttests of ROM, PPT, and heel raises to failure (HRF) were completed at 5-min intervals. In sessions including gel application, immediately after posttest 2, the gels were manually applied on the dominant-leg calf muscles. In sessions including self-massage, 18 min after pretest 2, a rolling massage protocol of 3 sets of 30 s with 10-s rest for a score of 7/10 on the pain scale to cadence of 1 s for the full length of the muscle was conducted from the same sitting position. Statistical analysis: A 5 conditions 4 times repeated-measures ANOVA () was used to analyze PPT and ROM, whereas a 5 conditions 2 times ANOVA was used for HRF. Results: There were no significant main effects for condition or any interactions. A main effect for time (P = 0.031) showed meaningful but no statistically significant (P = 0.1) increases in PPT with near-significant increases between pretest 1 (35.9 6 10.1 kg) and pretest 2 (38.3 6 12.6 kg) and significant (P = 0.02) increases from posttest 1 (36.3 6 11.4 kg) to posttest 2 (38.9 6 12.8 kg). ROM also showed a main effect for time (P < 0.0001), with significant improvements between all times and with the exception of results from posttest 1 to posttest 2 [pretest 1 (13.8 6 3.1 cm), pretest 2 (14.08 6 3.2 cm), posttest 1 (14.28 6 2.9 cm), posttest 2 (14.4 6 3.3 cm)]. HRF showed a main effect for time, with a significant (P = 0.006) decrease in repetitions from posttest 1 (22.1 6 6.7) to posttest 2 (20.4 6 4.4).