How foam rolling and myofascial release affect recovery and performance for running, OCR, and endurance sports
Thomas Solomon, PhD.
Updated onReading time approx 4 minutes (1000 words).
What you’ll learn:
Foam rolling is a self-massage technique, often called “myofascial release”.
Foam rolling is likely to reduce how sore you feel, but it’s unlikely to boost performance or speed up the recovery of performance.
Curious about the how and why? Scroll down for the details, the nuances, and the nerdy bits.
The information I provide is not medical advice. Before making any changes to your habits of daily living based on any information I provide, always ensure it is safe for you to do so and consult your doctor if you are unsure.
What is foam rolling?
Foam rolling is my favourite kind of self-experiment: you take a cylindrical lump of foam, press it into a muscle, then roll around on it like a mildly confused sea lion. Some people find it soothing. Some people find it kinda spicy. And, if it’s painful, the obvious question pops up: “is more pain really the goal when I’m trying to recover?”.
You can buy foam rollers in basically every shape and texture imaginable, from “gentle yoga prop” to “medieval punishment device”. Fans will tell you it “triggers mechanoreceptors”, “increases blood flow”, “boosts flexibility”, “releases endorphins”, and “alleviates fatigue”. The catch is that we still don’t really know what foam rolling does at the cellular and molecular level. Yet it’s wildly popular — lots of runners own one, gyms have piles of them, and some people use them as a stand-in for a massage therapist. Heck, you can even become “certified” in foam rolling.
What is the scientific evidence on the effect of foam rolling and myofascial release on recovery and athletic performance?
A single bout on a foam roller before a session increases joint range of motion (i.e., how far a joint can move; see Skinner et al. 2020, Hendricks et al. 2019 & Wiewelhove et al. 2019). This is most useful if flexibility is genuinely important for your sport (sometimes it is, sometimes it’s just a party trick).
Regular foam rolling may also increase joint range of motion, especially at the knee and particularly with longer interventions (for example, at least 4 weeks of regular rolling), but more high-quality studies are needed to be confident (see Martínez-Aranda et al. 2024, Konrad et al. 2024, Konrad et al. 2022, Pagaduan et al. 2022 & Skinner et al. 2020).
Foam rolling before a session does not appear to improve performance (Martínez-Aranda et al. 2024, Glänzel et al. 2022, Skinner et al. 2020, Hendricks et al. 2019, & Wiewelhove et al. 2019). The performance effect looks similar to stretching before a session (Wilke et al. 2019 & Konrad et al. 2021). But the type of stretching might matter. One meta-analysisA meta-analysis quantifies the overall effect size of a treatment by compiling effect sizes from all known studies of that treatment. (Konrad et al. 2021) found that pre-exercise foam rolling may improve quadriceps strength when compared to pre-exercise static stretching but not dynamic stretching. Still, more work is needed to confirm this nuance because the review pooled lots of very different exercise tests (lifting, jumping, sprinting, etc.) into a single “performance” bucket.
Combining foam rolling with stretching as part of a warm-up has a small effect on increasing range of motion compared with doing nothing, but it has no added benefit over either foam rolling or stretching alone (see Konrad et al. 2021). This combined approach might also improve power (jump height) and sprint performance compared with stretching alone, but perhaps only when foam rolling is followed by stretching (see Konrad et al. 2021). The catch: there are few studies on the order of warm-up methods, and the review pooled lots of different exercise tests into one outcome again.
Regular foam rolling for several weeks does not improve performance (see Martínez-Aranda et al. 2024, Konrad et al. 2022, and Pagaduan et al. 2022), but studies have mainly tested strength, power, and vertical jump height. Studies on endurance performance are lacking.
So, a foam roller doesn’t seem to make performance better, but it also doesn’t seem to make it worse (see Konrad et al. 2022, Pagaduan et al. 2022, Glänzel et al. 2022, Skinner et al. 2020, Hendricks et al. 2019, & Wiewelhove et al. 2019). That said, we don’t know if rolling a genuinely painful muscle is helpful or harmful. I’d side with caution: recovery shouldn’t involve chasing extra pain.
Foam rolling after a session might reduce feelings of muscle soreness (Martínez-Aranda et al. 2024, Zhou et al. 2024, Skinner et al. 2020, Hendricks et al. 2019, & Wiewelhove et al. 2019) but it is unlikely to do so after a session that causes exercise-induced muscle damage (Medeiros et al. 2023). Because study designs vary a lot and there are not enough high-quality studies, it’s hard to make firm conclusions (Medeiros et al. 2023).
Current evidence suggests that about 90 seconds of foam rolling per muscle group might be the minimum duration that reduces soreness (Hughes et al. 2019). But because studies use different methods, there is no consensus on the “best” approach (time, pressure, cadence, roller type, and so on). This lack of consensus makes me wonder how one can become “certified” in foam rolling (aka, myofascial release).
Can foam rolling enhance recovery and athletic performance?
Foam rolling is likely to increase joint range of motion (flexibility). The effect sizeA meta-analysis quantifies the overall effect size of a treatment by compiling effect sizes from all known studies of that treatment. is medium to large.
Foam rolling is also likely to reduce feelings of muscle soreness, with a small effect size.
However, foam rolling is unlikely to improve performance or the recovery of performance after exercise.
These effects appear to be similar between trained athletes and untrained folks, and between males and females.
Keep in mind: There is no consensus on the optimal foam rolling time, pressure, cadence, type of roller, and so on. Furthemore, there is heterogeneity (variability)Heterogeneity shows how much the results in different studies in a meta-analysis vary from each other. It is measured as the percentage of variation (the I2 value). A rule of thumb: if I2 is roughly 25%, that indicates low heterogeneity (good), 50% is moderate, and 75% indicates high heterogeneity (bad). High heterogeneity means there’s more variability in effects between studies and, therefore, a less precise overall effect estimate. in effects between studies, and there is a moderate risk of biasRisk of bias in a meta-analysis refers to the potential for systematic errors in the studies included in the analysis. Such errors can lead to misleading/invalid results and unreliable conclusions. This can arise because of issues with the way participants are selected (randomisation), how data is collected and analysed, and how the results are reported.. So, the overall certainty of evidenceCertainty of evidence tells us how confident we are that the published results accurately reflect the true effect. It’s based on factors like study design, risk of bias, consistency, directness, precision, and publication bias. High certainty means that the current evidence is so strong and consistent that future studies are unlikely to change conclusions. Whereas, low certainty means more doubt and less confidence, and that future studies could easily change current conclusions. is moderateA moderate quality of evidence means that, in general, studies in this field have some limitations. This could be due to somewhat inconsistent effects between studies, a moderate range of effect sizes between studies, and/or a moderate risk of bias (caused by a small to medium number of studies, small to medium numbers of participants, partially described randomisation processes, some missing data, some inappropriate methods/statistics). When the quality of evidence is moderate, there is some doubt and only moderate confidence in the overall effect of an intervention, and future studies could change overall conclusions. The best way to improve the quality of evidence is for scientists to conduct large, well-controlled, high-quality randomised controlled trials. at best. Therefore, additional high-quality randomised controlled trialsThe “gold standard” approach for determining whether a treatment has a causal effect on an outcome of interest. In such a study, a sample of people representing the population of interest is randomised to receive the treatment or a no-treatment placebo (control), and the outcome of interest is measured before and after the exposure to treatment/control. are needed to increase confidence in the overall effects reported in meta-analysesA meta-analysis quantifies the overall effect size of a treatment by compiling effect sizes from all known studies of that treatment..
The nice part: Foam rolling doesn’t seem to hurt recovery or performance. So if you enjoy it and it helps you feel better, go for it. Just remember: time and money spent doing recovery with something that has no obvious performance benefit might be better spent resting, eating something nutritious, and doing something calm. Also, it’s unclear whether rolling a painful muscle is sensible or not, so I’d err on the cautious side and skip it if it hurts.
How to use this: If you like foam rolling, treat it as a “feel-better” tool, not a “get-faster” tool. Use it gently (especially on sore areas), aim for about 90 seconds per muscle group if your goal is soreness relief, and don’t expect it to replace sleep, food, and chill time.
Information you can trust. All content on Veohtu is meticulously researched and written by Thomas Solomon, PhD. He does not sell supplements, recovery products, or ad space, and he has no sponsorships, brand affiliations, or ambassador roles. Everything you read reflects his independent views, shaped solely by peer-reviewed scientific evidence — and that will never change.
Full list of meta-analyses examining foam rolling for recovery
Here are the meta-analyses I've summarised above:
Preventive effect of foam rolling on muscle soreness after exercise: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Zhou et al. J Bodyw Mov Ther. (2024)
Static Stretch Training versus Foam Rolling Training Effects on Range of Motion: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Konrad et al. Sports Med. (2024)
Effects of Self-Myofascial Release on Athletes' Physical Performance: A Systematic Review. Martínez-Aranda et al. J Funct Morphol Kinesiol. (2024)
Acute effects of foam roller or stick massage on indirect markers from exercise-induced muscle damage in healthy individuals: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Flávia Medeiros, Wagner Martins, David Behm, Deise Ribeiro, Emmanuela Marinho, Wanderson Santos, Ricardo Borges Viana. J Bodyw Mov Ther. 2023
Myofascial release strategies and technique recommendations for athletic performance: A systematic review. Maria Elisa Duarte França, Mayane Dos Santos Amorim, Larissa Sinhorim, Gilmar Moraes Santos, Iramar Baptistella do Nascimento. J Bodyw Mov Ther. 2023
The Effects of Foam Rolling Training on Performance Parameters: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis including Controlled and Randomized Controlled Trials. Andreas Konrad, Masatoshi Nakamura, David George Behm. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022
Foam Rolling Acute Effects on Myofascial Tissue Stiffness and Muscle Strength: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Marcelo H Glänzel, Deivid R Rodrigues, Gustavo N Petter, Daniel Pozzobon, Marco A Vaz, Jeam M Geremia. J Strength Cond Res. 2022
The effects of foam rolling on ankle dorsiflexion range of motion in healthy adults: A systematic literature review. Rob Grieve, Brendan Byrne, Charlie Clements, Laura-Jayne Davies, Edward Durrant, Oliver Kitchen. J Bodyw Mov Ther. 2022
Foam Rolling Training Effects on Range of Motion: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Andreas Konrad, Masatoshi Nakamura, Markus Tilp, Olyvia Donti & David G. Behm. Sports Med. 2022
Chronic Effects of Foam Rolling on Flexibility and Performance: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials. Jeffrey Cayaban Pagaduan,Sheng-Yuan Chang & Nai-Jen Chang. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022
The Accumulated Effects of Foam Rolling Combined with Stretching on Range of Motion and Physical Performance: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Andreas Konrad, Masatoshi Nakamura, Daniel Bernsteiner, Markus Tilp. J Sports Sci Med. 2021
A Comparison of the Effects of Foam Rolling and Stretching on Physical Performance. A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Andreas Konrad, Markus Tilp, Masatoshi Nakamura. Front Physiol. 2021
A systematic review and meta-analysis of the effects of foam rolling on range of motion, recovery and markers of athletic performance. Skinner B, Moss R, Hammond L. J Bodyw Mov Ther. 2020
Acute Effects of Foam Rolling on Range of Motion in Healthy Adults: A Systematic Review with Multilevel Meta-analysis. Wilke J, Müller AL, Giesche F, Power G, Ahmedi H, Behm DG. Sports Med. 2020
Effects of foam rolling on performance and recovery: A systematic review of the literature to guide practitioners on the use of foam rolling. Hendricks S, Hill H, Hollander SD, Lombard W, Parker R. J Bodyw Mov Ther. 2020
Duration of myofascial rolling for optimal recovery, range of motion, and performance: A systematic review of the literature. Hughes GA, Ramer LM. Int J Sports Phys Ther. 2019
A Meta-Analysis of the Effects of Foam Rolling on Performance and Recovery. Wiewelhove T, Döweling A, Schneider C, Hottenrott L, Meyer T, Kellmann M, Pfeiffer M, Ferrauti A. Front Physiol. 2019
An Evidence-Based Approach for Choosing Post-exercise Recovery Techniques to Reduce Markers of Muscle Damage, Soreness, Fatigue, and Inflammation: A Systematic Review With Meta-Analysis. Dupuy O, Douzi W, Theurot D, Bosquet L, Dugué B. Front Physiol. 2018
The effects of self-myofascial release using a foam roll or roller massager on joint range of motion, muscle recovery, and performance: A systematic review. Cheatham SW, Kolber MJ, Cain M, Lee M. Int J Sports Phys Ther. 2015
Share this article with your people:
Who is Thomas Solomon?
My knowledge has been honed following 20+ years of running, cycling, hiking, cross-country skiing, lifting, and climbing, 15+ years of academic research at world-leading universities and hospitals, and 10+ years advising and coaching in athletic performance and lifestyle change.
I have a BSc in Biochemistry, a PhD in Exercise Science, and over 90 peer-reviewed publications in medical journals.
I'm also an ACSM-certified Exercise Physiologist (ACSM-EP), an ACSM-certified Personal Trainer (ACSM-CPT), a VDOT-certified Distance Running Coach, and a UKVRN Registered Nutritionist (RNutr).
Since 2002, I’ve conducted biomedical research in exercise and nutrition and have taught and led university courses in exercise physiology, active recovery, biochemistry, and molecular medicine.
And, with my personal experience of competing on the track (800m to 10,000m), the road (5 k to marathon), on the trails, and in the mountains, by foot, bicycle, cross-country ski, and during obstacle course races (OCR), I deeply understand what it's like to train and compete — I've been there, done it, and gotten sweat, mud, and tears on my t-shirt.
Disclaimer: I occasionally mention brands and products, but it is important to know that I don't sell recovery products, supplements, or ad space, and I'm not affiliated with / sponsored by / an ambassador for / receiving advertisement royalties from any brands. I have conducted biomedical research for which I’ve received research money from publicly-funded national research councils and medical charities, and also from private companies, including Novo Nordisk Foundation, AstraZeneca, Amylin, the A.P. Møller Foundation, and the Augustinus Foundation. I’ve also consulted for Boost Treadmills and Gu Energy on R&D grant applications, and I provide research and scientific writing services for Examine.com. Some of my articles contain links to information provided by Examine.com but I do not receive any royalties or bonuses from those links. Importantly, none of the companies described above have had any control over the research design, data analysis, or publication outcomes of my work. I research and write my content using state-of-the-art, consensus, peer reviewed, and published scientific evidence combined with my empirical evidence observed in practice and feedback from athletes. My advice is, and always will be, based on my own views and opinions shaped by the scientific evidence available. The information I provide is not medical advice. Before making any changes to your habits of daily living based on any information I provide, always ensure it is safe for you to do so and consult your doctor if you are unsure.