Meta-analyses of the effect of flossing on ankle range of motion and power jump performance

Abstract

Decreased ankle range of motion (ROM) leads to many disorders, ranging in severity from gait abnormalities to knee and pelvis injuries. Therefore, maintaining full ankle ROM is very important, especially for athletes, for whom ankle ROM may affect their results during competitions. Medical flossing is a technique used by physiotherapists to improve ROM. The aim of this review was to investigate the effect of medical flossing on ankle ROM according to the results in previous studies.

‪The search was conducted with the following key words individually and/or in combinations: range of motion, flossband, mobility bands, vascular occlusion, flossing bands, compression, voodoo floss, and tack floss.

F‪rom the identified 5600 articles, only 4 studies were included in this systematic review. The results showed that the mean difference in ROM after treatment was 1.20 cm (Hedge’s g = 0.31, p < 0.01, I2= 89%).

‪There is evidence showing that the application of flossing can be beneficial to increase the ROM. Moreover, some of the studies confirmed a positive impact of flossing on jump performance; nonetheless, data to confirm this effect in this review are insufficient.

Full text

www.balticsportscience.com
Meta-analyses of the eect of ossing
on ankle range of motion and power
jump performance
Anna Pisz1 ABCDEF, Katerina Kralova1 BE, Dusan Blazek1 BCF, Artur Golas2 AD,
Petr Stastny1 CDG
1 Faculty of Physical Education and Sport, Charles University in Prague, Czech Republic
2 The Jerzy Kukuczka Academy of Physical Education in Katowice, Poland
article details
Article statistics: Word count: 2,844; Tables: 2; Figures: 3; References: 32
Received: April 2020; Accepted: May 2020; Published: June 2020
Full-text PDF: http://www.balticsportscience.com
Copyright © Gdansk University of Physical Education and Sport, Poland
Indexation: Celdes, Clarivate Analytics Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI), CNKI Scholar (China National Knowledge
Infrastructure), CNPIEC, De Gruyter - IBR (International Bibliography of Reviews of Scholarly Literature in
the Humanities and Social Sciences), De Gruyter - IBZ (International Bibliography of Periodical Literature
in the Humanities and Social Sciences), DOAJ, EBSCO - Central & Eastern European Academic Source, EBSCO
- SPORTDiscus, EBSCO Discovery Service, Google Scholar, Index Copernicus, J-Gate, Naviga (Softweco, Primo
Central (ExLibris), ProQuest - Family Health, ProQuest - Health & Medical Complete, ProQuest - Illustrata: Health
Sciences, ProQuest - Nursing & Allied Health Source, Summon (Serials Solutions/ProQuest, TDOne (TDNet), Ulrich’s
Periodicals Directory/ulrichsweb, WorldCat (OCLC)
Funding: This research was funded by Charles University grant UNCE HUM 032 and student support SVV 260466.
Conict of interests: Authors have declared that no competing interest exists.
Corresponding author: Anna Pisz, Faculty of Physical Education and Sport, Charles University in Prague, Jose Martiho 269, 162 52 Prague, Czech
Republic. Phone: +420703952913, E-mail: piszan@gmail.com
Open Access License: This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non-commercial 4.0
International (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits use, distribution, and reproduction in
any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non-commercial and is otherwise in compliance
with the license.
Authors’ Contribution:
A Study Design
B Data Collection
C Statistical Analysis
D Data Interpretation
E Manuscript Preparation
F Literature Search
G Funds Collection
Baltic Journal of Health and Physical Activity 2020; 12 (2): 19-26
Journal of Gdansk University of Physical Education and Sport
e-ISSN 2080-9999
19
REVIEW
doi: 10.29359/BJHPA.12.2.03
abstract
Decreased ankle range of motion (ROM) leads to many disorders, ranging in severity from gait
abnormalities to knee and pelvis injuries. Therefore, maintaining full ankle ROM is very important,
especially for athletes, for whom ankle ROM may aect their results during competitions. Medical
ossing is a technique used by physiotherapists to improve ROM. The aim of this review was to
investigate the eect of medical ossing on ankle ROM according to the results in previous studies.
The search was conducted with the following key words individually and/or in combinations: range of
motion, ossband, mobility bands, vascular occlusion, ossing bands, compression, voodoo oss, and
tack oss.
From the identied 5600 articles, only 4 studies were included in this systematic review. The results showed
that the mean dierence in ROM after treatment was 1.20 cm (Hedge’s g = 0.31, p < 0.01, I2= 89%).
There is evidence showing that the application of ossing can be benecial to increase the ROM.
Moreover, some of the studies conrmed a positive impact of ossing on jump performance;
nonetheless, data to conrm this eect in this review are insucient.
Key words: medical ossing, range of motion, jump performance.

Szczesna-Kaczmarek A
Blood K+ concentration balance after prolonged submaximal exercise...
Balt J Health Phys Act 2014; 1(1): 233-244
20
www.balticsportscience.com
introduction
Flexibility is the ability to move a joint through its full range of motion (ROM)
with control. A lack of mobility in one joint can lead to injuries and pain along the
kinetic chain [1]. By increasing ROM, we may be able to enhance performance
and reduce the risk of injury, and athletes should possess a level of exibility
that is appropriate for their chosen activities [2]. Moreover, increased ROM
leads to improvements in vertical jumps [3]. Currently, there are many methods
available to acutely increase ROM, one of which is medical ossing, also
known as voodoo ossing [4]. It is assumed that the possible mechanisms of
improvements in ankle ROM due to ossing are connected with fascial shearing
and blood-ow restriction. Perhaps, this is a similar process to that of blood-ow
restriction training through which increased amounts of growth hormones and
catecholamine responses arise, increasing muscle forces and contractility and
the eiciency of excitation-contraction coupling in the muscles [5, 6]. Fascia
is a tough connective tissue that is present throughout the body in a three-
dimensional web from head to toe. Fasciae are ubiquitous, surrounding every
muscle, bone, nerve, blood vessel and organ at the cellular level. Generally, the
fascial system provides support, stability and cushioning. It is also important
for locomotion and dynamic exibility due to muscle involvement, and it is
considered the main contributor to proprioception in the body [7, 8]. Fasciae play
the main role in movement coordination and muscle interaction. An insuicient
amount of exible fasciae can lead to weakened muscles and poor muscular
biomechanics, which lead to a decreased ROM, altered structural alignment
and reduced endurance and motor coordination [9, 10]. Shearing caused by
rubber bands might decrease the stiness of the fascia, the main eect of which
is an increase in ROM.
As mentioned above, ossing may have similar mechanisms to ischemic
preconditioning/blood-ow occlusion/restriction training. In addition to the
hormonal response it yields, ischemic preconditioning has been shown to
improve muscle contraction eiciency, possibly by increasing muscle forces
and contractility [11], and/or to improve the quality of excitation-contraction
coupling [12]. Flossing can be applied to any joint or muscle in the body. However,
because the ankle joint is important for walking, jumping and landing, most of
the previous studies have focused on the ankle. The ankle is a complex part of
the human body [13]. Proper biomechanical function of the ankle is required
for the lower extremities to function normally [14]. Changes in ROM can lead
to many dysfunctions, both in normal daily living, as ankle dorsiexion (DF) is
required during walking [15], and during sport activities, as DF is an important
strategy used to absorb shock when landing after a jump [16, 17]; limitations
in the movement of the ankle lead to restricted knee exion displacement
and knee valgus displacement during landing and squatting. All these issues
may contribute to increased anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury risk,
patellofemoral pain and other lower-limb injuries [17−22].
There is a limited amount of research on ossing, and no review articles have
been conducted. Kiefer et al. [23] assessed the eect of ossing on glenohumeral
exion in child’s posture. The results showed that there were no signicant
dierences between the ossing and control groups; however, participants
indicated more signicantly perceived benets from the intervention in terms
of mobility. Moreover, the glenohumeral joint is considered diicult to wrap with
tape, unlike the ankle, which is the main point of interest in this eld.
Pisz A, Kralova K, Blazek D, Golas A, Stastny P.
Flossing eect on ankle ROM and jump performance
Balt J Health Phys Act. 2020;12(2):19-26

21
www.balticsportscience.com
Baltic Journal of Health and Physical Activity 2014; 1(1): 1-4
Journal of Gdansk University of Physical Education and Sport
e-ISSN 2080-9999
Although an eect of ossing has been documented, it has not been determi-
ned how large impact can be expected with this method; therefore, the aim of
this study was to conduct a meta-analysis on the eects of ossing on aspects
of performance.
material and methods
search strategies
The review included studies that examined the eects of ossing on the ankle
range of motion. The articles in the Scopus, PubMed, PEDro and Google Scholar
databases were searched. The search took place in November 2019, and the
results were not restricted by dates. The databases were searched by using
the following keywords: range of motion, ossband, mobility bands, vascular
occlusion, ossing bands, compression, voodoo oss, and tack oss. These key
words were used individually and/or in combination.
stu dy selection
The inclusion criteria for the studies in this review were as follows: the study
contained a research question regarding the inuence of ossing on the ankle
range of motion; the ROM test was performed with the standard methodology,
with the results reported in cm; and the study was published in English. The
exclusion criteria were the text not in English, poor methodological design
or measured parameters.
quali tative comparison
Qualitative analyses were performed using RevMan version 5.3 (Copenhagen).
Weighted means was used to calculate the ossing eect among dierent
studies and e. Hedges’ g was consequently chosen for eect size. I2 was used
to assess heterogeneity.
results
The search process is presented in Figure 1. In total, 5503 records were
identied with search keywords in the Scopus database, and 132 records were
identied from other sources. After the duplicate articles were removed, a
total of 5600 articles remained. After the abstracts were screened, 28 articles
remained, and 22 articles were excluded because they were not suitable for
a systematic review. The full texts of six articles were used to determine their
eligibility (Supplementary material 1), and two of them were not suitable for
qualitative comparison with other studies. In total, 4 records were included in
the meta-analysis. In total, those 4 documents involved 145 participants, where
all studies used weight-bearing lunge test (WLBT). One article was missing a
control group because it used a crossover design. The remaining study [24]
used the contralateral leg, which did not undergo the ossing treatment, for
comparison, or the participants attended another session to obtain control
group results.
Table 1 and Figure 2 show the main results of the included studies, where
all authors of these studies concluded that ossing increases the ankle range
of motion. Table 2 and Figure 3 show the reported changes in the included
studies. The weighted mean dierence in ROM after treatment was 1.20 cm
Baltic Journal of Health and Physical Activity 2020; 12 (2): 19-26
Journal of Gdansk University of Physical Education and Sport
e-ISSN 2080-9999

22
www.balticsportscience.com
Baltic Journal of Health and Physical Activity 2014; 1(1): 1-4
Journal of Gdansk University of Physical Education and Sport
e-ISSN 2080-9999
(Hedge’s g = 0.31, CI [0.086, 0.529], Z = 2.719, p < 0.01, I2 = 89%). The
control groups did not show any dierences between pre and post treatment.
The same result was conrmed in the two other studies, where one was a
single case and the other reported the increased ROM in degrees [25, 26]. The
jump performance increase has been reported in two studies performed by
Driller and one study performed by Mills [24, 27, 28]. In his rst study Driller
measured jump height and velocity which makes it incomparable with the
other two studies, where peak force was measured during Counter Movement
Jump (CMJ). Results have shown 4 cm improvement in the jump height and
0.15 (m.s-1) jump velocity improvement [24]. In another Driller study, the
ossing impact on CMJ peak force was measured after application. Results
have shown increasing of the peak force in the following order: 69 ± 67N after
5 minutes (d = 0.16), 56 ± 70N after 15 minutes (d = 0.13), 135 ± 148N after
30 minutes (d = 0.32) and 89 ± 101N after 45 minutes (d = 0.21) [27]. Mills
also compared CMJ peak force pre and post values after 5 and 30 minutes,
which resulted in 90 ±117N (d = 0.28 ±0.45) improvement after 5 minutes
after oss application, and -37 ±77N (d =- 0.12 ±0.30). Overall, those results
showed a benecial impact of ossing application on the jump performance.
Fig. 1. PRISMA owchart of the search process
Table 1. Eects of ossing on ankle range of motion (cm)
References n Preossing Postossing Pre control Post control
Mean ± SD Mean ± SD Mean ± SD Mean ± SD
Driller [24] 52 10.9 ± 6 12.7 ± 6.5 11.4 ± 6.7 11. 6 ± 6.5
Driller [27] 69 8.9 ± 3.6 9.7 ± 3.7 8.3 ± 3.3 8.3 ±3.7
Mills [28] 14 9.9 ± 3.4 10.3 ± 3.5 9.7 ± 4.0 10.1 ± 3.5
Ross [22] right leg 10 7±1.5 8.15 ± 1.5 - -
Ross [22] left leg 10 6.7 ± 2.7 8.65 ± 2.03 - -
Pisz A, Kralova K, Blazek D, Golas A, Stastny P.
Flossing eect on ankle ROM and jump performance
Balt J Health Phys Act. 2020;12(2):19-26

23
www.balticsportscience.com
Baltic Journal of Health and Physical Activity 2014; 1(1): 1-4
Journal of Gdansk University of Physical Education and Sport
e-ISSN 2080-9999
Fig. 2. Comparison of the preossing and postossing results
Table 2. Eects of ossing on ankle range of motion (cm)
References n Dierence between Eect size/
pre- and postossing (cm) condence interval
Driller [24] 52 1.8 0.29
Driller [27] 69 0.8 0.2
Mills [28] 14 0.4 95% CI 0.01-0.18 cm
Ross [22] right leg 10 1.15 90% CI 0.5-1.8 cm
Ross [22] left leg 10 1.95 90% CI 0.5-1.2 cm
Weighted mean 1.20
Fig. 3. Comparison of all pre- and postossing outcome measures
Baltic Journal of Health and Physical Activity 2020; 12 (2): 19-26
Journal of Gdansk University of Physical Education and Sport
e-ISSN 2080-9999

24
www.balticsportscience.com
Baltic Journal of Health and Physical Activity 2014; 1(1): 1-4
Journal of Gdansk University of Physical Education and Sport
e-ISSN 2080-9999
discussion
In the rst quantitative systematic review of the ossing eect on the ankle
range of motion, the evidence shows a small benecial eect of ossing.
Some of those papers reported few indicators; for instance, Driller and Mills
assessed countermovement jumps (CMJs) after ossing, and in both studies,
the outcomes yielded positive results. Based on these results, it can be assumed
that ossing improves jump performance; however, more research needs to
be conducted. Moreover, ossing can be applied to any part of the body that
has fascia, but for now, most of the articles have focused on the ankle. This
focus should be broadened, and new parts of the body should be explored to
discover the potential of ossing. A study made by Hodeaux was assessed the
impact of ossing application on the elbow ROM [29], and in another study
ossing was applied to the glenohumeral joint to assess its eiciency [23].
Since improvement in the ankle ROM at the 0.6 cm level was considered large
[30], the change in dorsiexion measured with WBT at the 1.2 cm level can
be considered a large increase in ankle mobility. On the other hand, the most
signicant limitation of this study is the dierences in studies participants:
in two studies, they were recreational athletes; in another study, they were
professional athletes; and in the last study, the participants were individuals
free from lower extremity injuries for 3 months. However, we can assume that
ossing is benecial to participants at dierent performance levels.
Driller et al. suggested the benecial inuence of ossing on the ankle ROM and
jump performance. In his rst article, he assessed 52 recreational athletes by
using the WLBT, measuring ankle DF and plantar exion (PF) with a goniometer
and measuring single vertical jump height and velocity with a Gymaware
device. The results showed a signicant improvement in all test measures pre-
to postintervention (p < 0.01) [24]. In his second study, 69 recreational athletes
performed the WBLT, countermovement jump (CMJ) and a 15 m sprint test
(SPRINT) before and up to 45 minutes after the application of the ossband to
both ankles (n = 38), and the control group did not receive ossing (n = 31). There
were signicant dierences (p > 0.05) between the FLOSS and CON groups in
the results for the WBLT, CMJ and 15 m sprint [27]. Stevenson et al. measured
the inuence of ossing in 5 male recreational athletes. They used a goniometer
and the WBLT to obtain the results, which showed that DF signicantly improved
in the ossing group compared with the control group [26].
A group of scientists from New Zealand determined the eect of ossing
in 14 professional male rugby union athletes (mean ± SD: age; 23.9 ± 2.7)
[28]. They applied ossing for two minutes to both ankles and performed the
same measurements without ossing on a separate day for the control data.
The WBLT, CMJ and 20-meter sprint were performed, and the outcomes were
assessed 5 minutes after and 30 minutes after application. The results showed
a small but non-signicant (p > 0.05) benet in the FLOSS group compared
with the CON group for the CMJ at 5 minutes post-intervention (d = 0.28)
and for sprinting for 10 meters (d = -0.45) and 15 meters (d = -0.24) at 30
minutes after the intervention [28]. Therefore, the results of ossing on jump
performance should be more clearly evaluated.
In a study performed by Reid et al. [30], improvement in the ankle ROM was
measured by the mobilization-with-movement (MWM) technique on talocrural
joints. Dorsiexion was assessed using a weight-bearing lunge test. They used
Pisz A, Kralova K, Blazek D, Golas A, Stastny P.
Flossing eect on ankle ROM and jump performance
Balt J Health Phys Act. 2020;12(2):19-26

Szczesna-Kaczmarek A
Blood K+ concentration balance after prolonged submaximal exercise...
Balt J Health Phys Act 2014; 1(1): 233-244
25
www.balticsportscience.com
a crossover design with randomized allocation to either a sham mobilization
group or the MWM technique group. The results showed that the change in
dorsiexion following the MWM technique (0.63 ± 0.89 cm) was signicantly
larger (p = 0.02) than the change following the sham technique (0.18 ± 0.35
cm). Vicenzino et al. [31] measured the changes in the posterior talar glide and
dorsiexion of the ankle after mobilization with movement (MWM) in individuals
with recurrent ankle sprains. The results showed that both the weight-bearing
and non-weight-bearing MWMs signicantly improved dorsiexion by 26%
(p < 0.17) in a WBLT test. Dorsiexion before treatment was 4.2 ± 1.6 cm for
weight-bearing WMWs and 4.3 ± 1.9 cm for non-weight-bearing MWMs, and
those after treatment were 4.8 ± 1.5 cm for WB_MWMs and 4.8 ± 1.5 cm for
NWB_MWMs, which yielded 0.6 cm of improvement for WB WMWs and 0.5 cm
of improvement for NWB_WMWs.
Weight Bearing Lunge Test (WBLT) is a very reliable test to measure the
dorsiexion (DF) range of movement in the ankle joint [32]. It does not require
any tools, and the methodology is not complicated; therefore, it is a popular
choice among researchers to assess the ankle ROM.
conclusions
After analyzing all the results and comparing ossing to other methods, it
can be assumed that ossing is a useful method to acutely increase ROM.
It can be used by physiotherapists during rehabilitation for individuals with
ankle ROM limitations and athletes as a part of warm-up, especially before
exercises that require a full ankle ROM, i.e., squats, CMJ. Moreover, it seems
to be a good technique for individuals who participate in sports that involve
jumping, e.g., volleyball and basketball; two studies proved that ossing could
improve jump performance.
references
[1] Storm JM, Wolman R, Bakker EWP, Wyon MA. The relationship between range of motion and injuries
in adolescent dancers and sportspersons: A systematic review. Front Psychol. 2018;9:287. https://
doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00287
[2] Andersen JC. Flexibility in performance: Foundational concepts and practical issues. Athl Ther Today.
2006;11(3):9-12. https://doi.org/10.1123/att.11.3.9
[3] Clansey A, Lees A, editors. Changes in lower limb joint range of motion on countermovement vertical
jumping. ISBS-Conference Proceedings Archive; 2010
[4] Starrett K, Cordoza G. Becoming a supple leopard: The ultimate guide to resolving pain, preventing
injury, and optimizing athletic performance. Victory Belt Publishing; 2013.
[5] Takarada Y, Nakamura Y, Aruga S, Onda T, Miyazaki S, Ishii N. Rapid increase in plasma growth hormone
after low-intensity resistance exercise with vascular occlusion. J Appl Physiol. 2000;88(1):61-5. https://
doi.org/10.1152/jappl.2000.88.1.61
[6] Reeves GV, Kraemer RR, Hollander DB, et al. Comparison of hormone responses following light
resistance exercise with partial vascular occlusion and moderately diicult resistance exercise without
occlusion. J Appl Physiol. 2006;101(6):1616-22. https://doi.org/10.1152/japplphysiol.00440.2006
[7] Stecco C, Porzionato A, Lancerotto L, et al. Histological study of the deep fasciae of the limbs. J
Bodyw Mov Ther. 2008;12(3):225-30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbmt.2008.04.041
[8] Myers TW. Anatomy trains: Myofascial meridians for manual and movement therapists. Churchill
Livingstone/Elsevier; 2014.
[9] Chaitow L. Somatic dysfunction and fascia's gliding-potential. J Bodyw Mov Ther. 2014;18:1-3. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.jbmt.2013.11.019
[10] Guimberteau JC, Delage JP, McGrouther DA, Wong JKF. The microvacuolar system: How
connective tissue sliding works. J Hand Surg (European Volume). 2010;35(8):614-22. https://doi.
org/10.1177/1753193410374412
[11] Lawson CS, Downey JM. Preconditioning: state of the art myocardial protection. Cardiovasc Res.
1993;27(4):542-50. https://doi.org/10.1093/cvr/27.4.542
[12] Pang CY, Yang RZ, Zhong A, Xu N, Boyd B, Forrest CR. Acute ischaemic preconditioning protects
against skeletal muscle infarction in the pig. Cardiovasc Res. 1995;29(6):782-8. https://doi.
org/10.1016/S0008-6363(96)88613-5
Baltic Journal of Health and Physical Activity 2020; 12 (2): 19-26
Journal of Gdansk University of Physical Education and Sport
e-ISSN 2080-9999

26
www.balticsportscience.com
Baltic Journal of Health and Physical Activity 2014; 1(1): 1-4
Journal of Gdansk University of Physical Education and Sport
e-ISSN 2080-9999
[13] Whiting WC, Zernicke RF. Biomechanics of musculoskeletal injury. Human Kinetics; 1998.
[14] Donatelli R. Normal biomechanics of the foot and ankle. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 1985;7(3):91-5.
https://doi.org/10.2519/jospt.1985.7.3.91
[15] Cosby NL, Grindstaff TL. Restricted ankle dorsiflexion self-mobilization. Strength Condit J.
2012;34(3):58-60. https://doi.org/10.1519/SSC.0b013e31824526e8
[16] Fong C-M, Blackburn JT, Norcross MF, McGrath M, Padua DA. Ankle-dorsiexion range of motion
and landing biomechanics. J Athl Train. 2011;46(1):5-10. https://doi.org/10.4085/1062-6050-46.1.5
[17] Malliaras P, Cook JL, Kent P. Reduced ankle dorsiexion range may increase the risk of patellar
tendon injury among volleyball players. J Sci Med Sport 2006;9(4):304-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jsams.2006.03.015
[18] Macrum E, Bell D, Boling M, Lewek M, Padua D. Eect of limiting ankle-dorsiexion range of motion
on lower extremity kinematics and muscle-activation patterns during a squat. J Sport Rehabil.
2012;21:144-50. https://doi.org/10.1123/jsr.21.2.144
[19] Hewett TE, Myer GD, Ford KR, et al. Biomechanical measures of neuromuscular control and valgus
loading of the knee predict anterior cruciate ligament injury risk in female athletes: A prospective
study. Am J Sports Med. 2005;33(4):492-501. https://doi.org/10.1177/0363546504269591
[20] Griin LY, Albohm MJ, Arendt EA, et al. Understanding and preventing noncontact anterior
cruciate ligament injuries: A review of the Hunt Valley II Meeting, January 2005. Am J Sports Med.
2006;34(9):1512-32. https://doi.org/10.1177/0363546506286866
[21] Tabrizi P, McIntyre W, Quesnel M, Howard A. Limited dorsiexion predisposes to injuries of the ankle
in children. J Bone Joint Surg. 2000;82-B:1103-6. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.82B8.0821103
[22] Ross S. The Eects of ‘tack and oss’ active joint mobilisation on ankle dorsiexion range of motion
using Voodoo Floss Bands. 2017.
[23] Kiefer BN, Lemarr KE, Enriquez CC, Tivener KA, Daniel T. A pilot study: Perceptual eects of the
Voodoo Floss Band on glenohumeral exibility. International Int J Athl Ther Train. 2017;22(4):29-33.
https://doi.org/10.1123/ijatt.2016-0093
[24] Driller MW, Overmayer RG. The eects of tissue ossing on ankle range of motion and jump
performance. Phys Ther Sport. 2017;25:20-4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ptsp.2016.12.004
[25] Borda J, Selhorst M. The use of compression tack and ossing along with lacrosse ball massage
to treat chronic Achilles tendinopathy in an adolescent athlete: a case report. J Man Manip Ther.
2017;25(1):57-61. https://doi.org/10.1080/10669817.2016.1159403
[26] Philip JS, Richelle KS, Kyle WD. Acute eects of the Voodoo Flossing Band on ankle range of motion.
J Med Biomed App Sci. 2019;7(6). https://doi.org/10.15520/jmbas.v7i6.190
[27] Driller M, Mackay K, Mills B, Tavares F. Tissue ossing on ankle range of motion, jump and
sprint performance: A follow-up study. Phys Ther Sport. 2017;28:29-33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ptsp.2017.08.081
[28] Mills B, Mayo B, Tavares F, Driller M. The eect of tissue ossing on ankle range of motion, jump and
sprint performance in elite rugby union athletes. J Sport Rehabil. 2019:1-18. https://doi.org/10.1123/
jsr.2018-0302
[29] Hodeaux K. The Eect of oss bands on elbow range of motion in tennis players. Theses and
Dissertations 2017. https://scholarworks.uark.edu/etd/1948
[30] Reid A, Birmingham T, Alcock G. Eicacy of mobilization with movement for patients with limited
dorsiexion after ankle sprain: A crossover trial. Physiother Can. 2007;59:166-72. https://doi.
org/10.3138/ptc.59.3.166
[31] Vicenzino B, Branjerdporn M, Teys P, Jordan K. Initial changes in posterior talar glide and dorsiexion
of the ankle after mobilization with movement in individuals with recurrent ankle sprain. J Orthop
Sports Phys Ther. 2006;36(7):464-71. https://doi.org/10.2519/jospt.2006.2265
[32] Konor MM, Morton S, Eckerson JM, Grindsta TL. Reliability of three measures of ankle dorsiexion
range of motion. Int J Sports Phys Ther. 2012;7(3):279-87.
Cite this article as:
Pisz A, Kralova K, Blazek D, Golas A, Stastny P.
Meta-analyses of the eect of ossing on ankle range of motion and power jump performance
Balt J Health Phys Act. 2020;12(2):19-26
doi: 10.29359/BJHPA.12.2.03
Pisz A, Kralova K, Blazek D, Golas A, Stastny P.
Flossing eect on ankle ROM and jump performance
Balt J Health Phys Act. 2020;12(2):19-26