Journal Logo

Presidential Closing Remarks 12: 05 PM – 12: 15 PM: Immediately Following President's Lectures ROOM: Ballroom 2/3 and Ballroom 1: B-18 Free Communication/Slide – Landing Mechanics: WEDNESDAY, MAY 31, 2006 1: 00 PM – 3: 00 PM: ROOM 401

The Effect of Massage on Force Production and Tensiomyography


2:15 PM – 2:30 PM

Hunter, Angus M.; Smith, Iain J.; Watt, Joan M.; Yirrell, Christine; Galloway, Stuart D.

Author Information
Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise: May 2006 - Volume 38 - Issue 5 - p S27
  • Free

We have previously shown a reduction in force production post massage with no concomitant change in neuromuscular recruitment.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the effect of massaged skeletal muscle on force production and it's contractile properties.

METHODS: Thirteen healthy male (aged 21.1 years ± 0.5) subjects performed three isokinetic concentric contractions after each TMG capture on the knee extensors at four pre-determined angular velocities; 60, 120, 180 and 240 °S−1. These contractions were performed before and after a thirty-minute intervention of either passive rest in the supine position or lower limb massage. TMG data was captured on both the Vastus Lateralis and Gastrocnemius immediately on subjects' arrival to the laboratory, after a standardised five-minute warm-up, and three minutes following the thirty minute intervention. Comparisons between massage and rest conditions were made using a one-way ANOVA with repeated measures.

RESULTS: A significant (p<0.05) interaction effect in force was observed Massage with the passive rest resulting in a increase compared to a decline after the massage at all 4 contraction velocities (Figure 1). The TMG contraction time when normalised to the first recording significantly (p<0.05) reduced from 106.6 (±11.2) to 100.2 (±12.6)% after the massage treatment while no change is shown from 105.1 (±8.4) to 106.2 (±9.4)% after the rest period for the Vastus Lateralis. The Gastrocnemius responded in the opposite direction with a significant (p<0.05) increase from 99.5 (±14.1) to 116.9 (±23.1)% after the massage treatment, while a reduction from 113.9 (± 20.6) to 106.5 (±17.6)% was shown after the rest period.


CONCLUSION: This study has shown that massage causes a reduction in force output due to a likely alteration in muscle architecture. Although, further investigation is required to examine the tensile response to massage on the different muscle groups and their influence on force production.

Supported by UK Sport

Figure 1 The change in isokinetic mean force at 60–240°S−1 contractions for both massage and rest interventions (interaction effect p<0.05).

© 2006 American College of Sports Medicine