THE ACUTE EFFECT OF TISSUE FLOSSING ON PAIN, FUNCTION, AND PERCEPTION OF MOVEMENT
Bibliographic record
Abstract
International Journal of Exercise Science 16(3): 855-865, 2023. Tissue flossing (TF) is a novel device that has been shown to cause peripheral compression and concurrent change in joint range of motion, perception of mobility and muscular performance. However, the effect of tissue flossing on pain, perception of mobility and function at the elbow joint has not been thoroughly investigated. The purpose of this pilot study was to examine the acute effect of TF on pain and upper extremity functional performance in subjects with musculoskeletal-related complaints of pain surrounding the elbow joint. We utilized a randomized crossover design. Nine resistance trained participants (8 men/1 woman) mean age 35.6 ± 10.7 took part in this study. We measured the following outcome measures; Pain Visual Analog Scale, Short Form McGill Pain Questionnaire II, pain-pressure threshold and hand grip dynamometry (HHD) pre and post and a Likert scale for movement ability questionnaire, posttest only, following a TF and placebo condition for each participant.TF resulted in significant improvement in all test measures, except HHD, pre to post (p ≤ 0.05). All pre to post changes were associated with large effect sizes for TF compared to the placebo condition applied to the elbow improves pain quality and intensity, perception of mobility and pain-pressure threshold in resistance trained individuals with a history of musculoskeletal pain for greater than 1 month. The results of this pilot study suggest that TF may function as an adjunct to treatment in the management of musculoskeletal pathologies at the elbow joint.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".