↓ Skip to main content

The Mechanisms of Massage and Effects on Performance, Muscle Recovery and Injury Prevention

Overview of attention for article published in Sports Medicine, September 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
16 X users
patent
2 patents
facebook
4 Facebook pages
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages
video
4 YouTube creators

Citations

dimensions_citation
515 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
1631 Mendeley
Title
The Mechanisms of Massage and Effects on Performance, Muscle Recovery and Injury Prevention
Published in
Sports Medicine, September 2012
DOI 10.2165/00007256-200535030-00004
Pubmed ID
Authors

Pornratshanee Weerapong, Patria A. Hume, Gregory S. Kolt

Abstract

Many coaches, athletes and sports medicine personnel hold the belief, based on observations and experiences, that massage can provide several benefits to the body such as increased blood flow, reduced muscle tension and neurological excitability, and an increased sense of well-being. Massage can produce mechanical pressure, which is expected to increase muscle compliance resulting in increased range of joint motion, decreased passive stiffness and decreased active stiffness (biomechanical mechanisms). Mechanical pressure might help to increase blood flow by increasing the arteriolar pressure, as well as increasing muscle temperature from rubbing. Depending on the massage technique, mechanical pressure on the muscle is expected to increase or decrease neural excitability as measured by the Hoffman reflex (neurological mechanisms). Changes in parasympathetic activity (as measured by heart rate, blood pressure and heart rate variability) and hormonal levels (as measured by cortisol levels) following massage result in a relaxation response (physiological mechanisms). A reduction in anxiety and an improvement in mood state also cause relaxation (psychological mechanisms) after massage. Therefore, these benefits of massage are expected to help athletes by enhancing performance and reducing injury risk. However, limited research has investigated the effects of pre-exercise massage on performance and injury prevention. Massage between events is widely investigated because it is believed that massage might help to enhance recovery and prepare athletes for the next event. Unfortunately, very little scientific data has supported this claim. The majority of research on psychological effects of massage has concluded that massage produces positive effects on recovery (psychological mechanisms). Post-exercise massage has been shown to reduce the severity of muscle soreness but massage has no effects on muscle functional loss. Notwithstanding the belief that massage has benefits for athletes, the effects of different types of massage (e.g. petrissage, effleurage, friction) or the appropriate timing of massage (pre-exercise vs post-exercise) on performance, recovery from injury, or as an injury prevention method are not clear. Explanations are lacking, as the mechanisms of each massage technique have not been widely investigated. Therefore, this article discusses the possible mechanisms of massage and provides a discussion of the limited evidence of massage on performance, recovery and muscle injury prevention. The limitations of previous research are described and further research is recommended.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 16 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 1,631 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 7 <1%
Brazil 5 <1%
Spain 4 <1%
United States 3 <1%
Canada 3 <1%
Japan 2 <1%
Germany 2 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
Other 8 <1%
Unknown 1595 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 418 26%
Student > Master 226 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 111 7%
Student > Postgraduate 88 5%
Other 85 5%
Other 267 16%
Unknown 436 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 504 31%
Medicine and Dentistry 225 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 171 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 61 4%
Social Sciences 40 2%
Other 160 10%
Unknown 470 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 46. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 April 2024.
All research outputs
#927,706
of 25,755,403 outputs
Outputs from Sports Medicine
#824
of 2,896 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,109
of 190,676 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Sports Medicine
#97
of 762 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,755,403 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,896 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 55.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 190,676 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 762 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.