Strength inhibition following an acute stretch is not limited to novice stretchers

Revisiting the stretch-induced force deficit: A systematic review with multilevel meta-analysis of acute effects

BACKGROUND

When recommending avoidance of static stretching prior to athletic performance, authors and practitioners commonly refer to available systematic reviews. However, effect sizes (ES) in previous reviews were extracted in major part from studies lacking control conditions and/or pre-post testing designs. Also, currently available reviews conducted calculations without accounting for multiple study outcomes, with ES: -0.03 to 0.10, which would commonly be classified as trivial.

METHODS

Since new meta-analytical software and controlled research articles have appeared since 2013, we revisited the available literatures and performed a multilevel meta-analysis using robust variance estimation of controlled pre-post trials to provide updated evidence. Furthermore, previous research described reduced electromyography activity-also attributable to fatiguing training routines-as being responsible for decreased subsequent performance. The second part of this study opposed stretching and alternative interventions sufficient to induce general fatigue to examine whether static stretching induces higher performance losses compared to other exercise routines.

RESULTS

Including 83 studies with more than 400 ES from 2012 participants, our results indicate a significant, small ES for a static stretch-induced maximal strength loss (ES = -0.21, p = 0.003), with high magnitude ES (ES = -0.84, p = 0.004) for stretching durations ≥60 s per bout when compared to passive controls. When opposed to active controls, the maximal strength loss ranges between ES: -0.17 to -0.28, p < 0.001 and 0.040 with mostly no to small heterogeneity. However, stretching did not negatively influence athletic performance in general (when compared to both passive and active controls); in fact, a positive effect on subsequent jumping performance (ES = 0.15, p = 0.006) was found in adults.

CONCLUSION

Regarding strength testing of isolated muscles (e.g., leg extensions or calf raises), our results confirm previous findings. Nevertheless, since no (or even positive) effects could be found for athletic performance, our results do not support previous recommendations to exclude static stretching from warm-up routines prior to, for example, jumping or sprinting.

Passive static stretching alters the characteristics of the force-velocity curvature differently for fast and slow muscle groups-A practical application of Hill's equation

Studies showed fast muscle fibers have a greater constant b value of Hill's equation than that of slow muscle fibers, and the changing ratio of b/V_max indicates the altered characteristics of muscles under certain conditions such as static stretching. This study was to investigate the effect of acute passive static stretching on the curvature of force-velocity curve in people with different muscle fiber types. A two-step work was conducted in current study through using Hill's equation: 1) calculated b values for each subject at different conditions (non-stretched and stretched) to determine muscle groups, and 2) examined the effect of static stretching on different muscle groups. Sixty-five college students performed isokinetic leg extensions at 5 speeds to test peak torque, following either a non-stretching or two passive static quadriceps stretching exercises. The peak torque and corresponding velocity were used to calculate the b constant. Data reduction consisted of calculating a Z score for each non-stretched and stretched b values. Individuals, whose non-stretched b constant was above or below one standard deviation of the Z score, were designated as the less curved (fast) and more curved (slow) groups, respectively. A paired t-test was used to analyze the pre and post intervention effect on b values for each group (p < 0.05). This study found passive static stretching significantly altered the b constant of the fast group, but no effect on slow group. Therefore, we suggest static stretching should be avoided immediately before fast or explosive activities in individuals using predominantly fast muscle fibers.

Time-based effects of different duration stretching on hamstring muscle strength

BACKGROUND

Stretching is believed to decrease muscle strength. The aim of this paper was to examine the time course (immediate, and 10- and 20-minutes post-stretching) for the effects of 2, 4, and 8 minutes of static-stretching (SS) on the isometric maximum voluntary contraction force (MVCF) of hamstring muscles with a pretest-post-test experiment design.

METHODS

A total of 14 subjects with a mean age of 25 years participated in three experimental trials on three different days. Day I for static stretching for 2 minutes (SS<inf>2</inf>), day II for 4 minutes (SS<inf>4</inf>), and day III for 8 minutes (SS<inf>8</inf>). Testing was conducted before (pre), immediately after (post), and at 10- and 20-minutes post-stretching. MVCF was measured using the strain gauze as the main outcome measure.

RESULTS

MVCF increased with SS<inf>2</inf> at 0 minutes (1.31%), 10 minutes (3.4%), and 20 minutes (4.1%) postintervention. MVCF increased with SS<inf>4</inf> at 0 minutes (1.13%), 10 minutes (9.6%) and 20 minutes (7.1%) postintervention. MVCF decreased with SS<inf>8</inf> at 0 minutes (2.9%), but increased at 10 minutes (1.86%) and 20 minutes (0.99%) postintervention. All these changes were not statistically significant (P>0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

In hamstring stretching, 2, 4 and 8 minutes increased MVCF, but results were not statistically significant. Thus, 2 to 8 minutes long-duration stretching exercises could safely be performed before a strength-training session.

Effects of different stretching methods on vertical jump ability and range of motion in young female artistic gymnastics athletes

BACKGROUND

Female artistic gymnastics includes multiple athletic gestures that can be performed by combining jump strength with wide degrees of joint mobility. The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of two different types of stretching on vertical jump height and range of motion in competitive gymnasts and to identify the most suitable stretching protocol for increasing range of motion, without negatively affecting vertical jump performance.

METHODS

In a crossover design, following dynamic stretching, static stretching, and control (no stretching), eight competitive female gymnasts (age: 14±2 years; BMI: 18.8±1.4 kg/m², mean±SD) were tested on jump performance through a squat jump, a countermovement jump and an acrobatic gymnastic jump, and on range of motion by measuring the amplitude of the forward oversplit figure.

RESULTS

One-way repeated measure ANOVA revealed significant main, very large effect of stretching condition (P<0.01). Post-hoc comparisons showed improvement of squat jump and countermovement jump after dynamic stretching with respect to static stretching and control (P<0.05). Range of motion increased significantly following static stretching with respect to dynamic stretching and control (P<0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Dynamic stretching is recommended in the warm-up to increase vertical jump performance, while specific static stretching should be pursued in the final phase of the training session being a specific technical work for range of motion.

Acute Effects of Static Stretching of Hamstring on Performance and Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury Risk During Stop-Jump and Cutting Tasks in Female Athletes

Ruan, M, Zhang, Q, and Wu, X. Acute effects of static stretching of hamstring on performance and anterior cruciate ligament injury risk during stop-jump and cutting tasks in female athletes. J Strength Cond Res 31(5): 1241–1250, 2017—There is limited research investigating antagonist stretch. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the influence of static stretching of hamstrings (SSH) on performance and anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury risk during stop-jump and 180° cutting tasks. Twelve female college athletes (age 20.8 ± 0.7 years; height 1.61 ± 0.05 m; mass 54.25 ± 4.22 kg) participated in this study. Subjects performed stop-jump and 180° cutting tasks under 2 conditions: after warm-up with 4 × 30 seconds SSH or after warm-up without SSH. Three-dimensional kinematic and kinetic data as well as electromyography of biceps femoris, rectus femoris, vastus medialis, and gastrocnemius medialis were collected during testing. Static stretching of hamstrings significantly enhanced jump height by 5.1% (p = 0.009) but did not change the takeoff speed of cutting. No significant changes in peak knee adduction moment or peak anterior tibia shear force were observed with SSH regardless of the task. The peak lateral tibia shear force during cutting was significantly (p = 0.036) reduced with SSH. The co-contraction of hamstring and quadriceps during the preactivation (stop-jump: p = 0.04; cutting: p = 0.05) and downward phases (stop-jump: p = 0.04; cutting: p = 0.05) was significantly reduced after SSH regardless of the task. The results suggest that SSH enhanced the performance of stop-jump because of decreased co-contraction of hamstring and quadriceps but did not change the performance of cutting. In addition, SSH did not increase ACL injury risk during stop-jump and cutting tasks and even reduced medial-lateral knee loading during cutting.

Comparison of isokinetic muscle strength and muscle power by types of warm-up

[Purpose] The purpose of this study was to clarify the influence of static stretching at warm-up on the isokinetic muscle torque (at 60°/sec) and muscle power (at 180°/sec) of the flexor muscle and extensor muscle of the knee joint. [Subjects and Methods] The subjects of this study were 10 healthy students with no medically specific findings. The warm-up group and warm-up with stretching group performed their respective warm-up prior to the isokinetic muscle torque evaluation of the knee joint. One-way ANOVA was performed by randomized block design for each variable. [Results] The results were as follows: First, the flexor peak torque and extensor peak torque of the knee joint tended to decrease at 60°/sec in the warm-up with stretching group compared with the control group and warm-up group, but without statistical significance. Second, extensor power at 180°/sec was also not statistically significant. However, it was found that flexor power increased significantly in the warm-up with stretching group at 180°/sec compared with the control group and warm-up group in which stretching was not performed. [Conclusion] Therefore, it is considered that in healthy adults, warm-up including two sets of stretching for 20 seconds per muscle group does not decrease muscle strength and muscle power.

Effects of static and dynamic stretching on sprint and jump performance in boys and girls

The aim of this study was to investigate the acute effects of static (SS) and dynamic stretching (DS) on explosive power, flexibility, and sprinting ability of adolescent boys and girls and to report possible gender interactions. Forty-seven active adolescent boys and girls were randomly tested after SS and DS of 40 seconds on quadriceps, hamstrings, hip extensors, and plantar flexors; no stretching was performed at the control condition. Pretreatment and posttreatment tests examined the effects of stretching on 20-m sprint run (20 m), countermovement jump (CMJ) height, and sit and reach flexibility test. In terms of performance, SS hindered 20 m and CMJ in boys and girls by 2.5 and 6.3%, respectively. Dynamic stretching had no effect on 20 m in boys and girls but impaired CMJ by 2.2%. In terms of flexibility, both SS and DS improved performance with SS being more beneficial (12.1%) compared with DS (6.5%). No gender interaction was found. It can therefore be concluded that SS significantly negates sprinting performance and explosive power in adolescent boys and girls, whereas DS deteriorates explosive power and has no effect on sprinting performance. This diversity of effects denotes that the mode of stretching used in adolescent boys and girls should be task specific.

Segurança, reprodutibilidade, fatores intervenientes e aplicabilidade de testes de 1-RM

Um dos métodos mais utilizados para mensuração da força muscular é o teste de uma repetição máxima (1-RM), tendo em vista a sua versatilidade para aplicação em diferentes exercícios, a especificidade do movimento e o baixo custo operacional. Neste trabalho discutimos as evidências disponíveis a respeito da segurança, da reprodutibilidade, dos fatores intervenientes e da aplicabilidade prática do teste de 1-RM. Com base nas informações disponíveis até o presente momento, o teste de 1-RM parece ser um método seguro do ponto de vista ortopédico e cardiovascular e a sua reprodutibilidade depende, fundamentalmente, da realização de procedimentos de testagem adequados para a estabilização da carga, assim como do controle dos fatores intervenientes os quais podem influenciar no desempenho do teste. Embora a aplicabilidade para o diagnóstico e acompanhamento da força muscular seja ampla, a utilização de testes de 1-RM para a prescrição de treinamento com pesos ainda é bastante discutível.

Acute effect of proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation stretching on the number of repetitions performed during a multiple set resistance exercise protocol

It has been proposed that fatigue during strength exercise is negatively influenced by prior proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation (PNF) stretching. However, it is possible that the effects of PNF on muscle endurance are affected by stretching duration. This study investigated the influence of PNF on the number of repetitions of the leg curl exercise performed with multiple sets and submaximal load. Nineteen men (age 25 ± 1 years, weight 75.8 ± 4.2 kg, height 178.1 ± 3.8 cm, 10-repetition maximum [RM] 78.3 ± 6.9 kg) performed 4 sets of leg curl with 10RM load with and without previous PNF (3 sets of hip flexion either with knees extended or flexed, duration ~2.5 minutes). The total number of repetitions decreased along sets in both situations (38.6% in control and 41.0% in PNF sessions, p < 0.001). However, no difference between control and PNF was detected for the number of repetitions in each set (first set, p = 0.330; second set, p = 0.072; third set, p = 0.061; fourth set, p = 0.150). In conclusion, the number of repetitions performed in multiple sets of the leg curl was not decreased by prior PNF stretching. Therefore, it appears that a moderate level of PNF could be used before resistance exercise with a minimal negative effect.

Plantar-flexor Static Stretch Training Effect on Eccentric and Concentric Peak Torque - A comparative Study of Trained versus Untrained Subjects

The aim of this study was to examine the long-term effects of static stretching of the plantar-flexor muscles on eccentric and concentric torque and ankle dorsiflexion range of motion in healthy subjects. Seventy five healthy male volunteers, with no previous history of trauma to the calf that required surgery, absence of knee flexion contracture and no history of neurologic dysfunction or disease, systemic disease affecting the lower extremities were selected for this study. The participants were divided into three equal groups. The control group did not stretch the plantar-flexor muscles. Two Experimental groups (trained and untrained) were instructed to perform static stretching exercise of 30 second duration and 5 repetitions twice daily. The stretching sessions were carried out 5 days a week for 6 weeks. The dorsiflexion range of motion was measured in all subjects. Also measured was the eccentric and concentric torque of plantar-flexors at angular velocities of 30 and 120°/s pre and post stretching. Analysis of variance showed a significant increase in plantar-flexor eccentric and concentric torque (p < 0.05) of trained and untrained groups, and an increase in dorsiflexion range of motion (p < 0.05) at both angular velocities for the untrained group only. The static stretching program of plantar-flexors was effective in increasing the concentric and eccentric plantarflexion torque at angular velocities of 30 and 120°/s. Increases in plantar-flexors flexibility were observed in untrained subjects.

Effect of acute static stretch on maximal muscle performance: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

The benefits of preexercise muscle stretching have been recently questioned after reports of significant poststretch reductions in force and power production. However, methodological issues and equivocal findings have prevented a clear consensus being reached. As no detailed systematic review exists, the literature describing responses to acute static muscle stretch was comprehensively examined.

METHODS

MEDLINE, ScienceDirect, SPORTDiscus, and Zetoc were searched with recursive reference checking. Selection criteria included randomized or quasi-randomized controlled trials and intervention-based trials published in peer-reviewed scientific journals examining the effect of an acute static stretch intervention on maximal muscular performance.

RESULTS

Searches revealed 4559 possible articles; 106 met the inclusion criteria. Study design was often poor because 30% of studies failed to provide appropriate reliability statistics. Clear evidence exists indicating that short-duration acute static stretch (<30 s) has no detrimental effect (pooled estimate = -1.1%), with overwhelming evidence that stretch durations of 30-45 s also imparted no significant effect (pooled estimate = -1.9%). A sigmoidal dose-response effect was evident between stretch duration and both the likelihood and magnitude of significant decrements, with a significant reduction likely to occur with stretches ≥ 60 s. This strong evidence for a dose-response effect was independent of performance task, contraction mode, or muscle group. Studies have only examined changes in eccentric strength when the stretch durations were >60 s, with limited evidence for an effect on eccentric strength.

CONCLUSIONS

The detrimental effects of static stretch are mainly limited to longer durations (≥ 60 s), which may not be typically used during preexercise routines in clinical, healthy, or athletic populations. Shorter durations of stretch (<60 s) can be performed in a preexercise routine without compromising maximal muscle performance.

A review of the acute effects of static and dynamic stretching on performance

An objective of a warm-up prior to an athletic event is to optimize performance. Warm-ups are typically composed of a submaximal aerobic activity, stretching and a sport-specific activity. The stretching portion traditionally incorporated static stretching. However, there are a myriad of studies demonstrating static stretch-induced performance impairments. More recently, there are a substantial number of articles with no detrimental effects associated with prior static stretching. The lack of impairment may be related to a number of factors. These include static stretching that is of short duration (<90 s total) with a stretch intensity less than the point of discomfort. Other factors include the type of performance test measured and implemented on an elite athletic or trained middle aged population. Static stretching may actually provide benefits in some cases such as slower velocity eccentric contractions, and contractions of a more prolonged duration or stretch-shortening cycle. Dynamic stretching has been shown to either have no effect or may augment subsequent performance, especially if the duration of the dynamic stretching is prolonged. Static stretching used in a separate training session can provide health related range of motion benefits. Generally, a warm-up to minimize impairments and enhance performance should be composed of a submaximal intensity aerobic activity followed by large amplitude dynamic stretching and then completed with sport-specific dynamic activities. Sports that necessitate a high degree of static flexibility should use short duration static stretches with lower intensity stretches in a trained population to minimize the possibilities of impairments.

Aerobic activity before and following short-duration static stretching improves range of motion and performance vs. a traditional warm-up

Many activities necessitate a high degree of static joint range of motion (ROM) for an extended duration. The objective of this study was to examine whether ROM could be improved with a short duration and volume of static stretching within a warm-up, without negatively impacting performance. Ten male recreationally active participants completed 2 separate protocols to examine changes in ROM and performance, respectively, with different warm-ups. The warm-up conditions for the ROM protocol were static stretching (SS), consisting of 6 repetitions of 6 s stretches; 10 min of running prior to the SS (AS); and 5 min of running before and after the SS (ASA). The performance protocol included a control condition of 10 min of running. Measures for the ROM protocol included hip flexion ROM, passive leg extensor tension, and hamstring electromyographic (EMG) activity at pre-warm-up, and at 1, 10, 20, and 30 min post-warm-up. Performance measures included countermovement jump (CMJ) height, reaction time (RT), movement time (MT), and balance at pre-warm-up and at 1 and 10 min post-warm-up. The ASA produced greater ROM overall than the SS and AS conditions (p < 0.0001), persisting for 30 min. There were no significant alterations in passive muscle tension or EMG. For the performance protocol, there were no main effects for condition, but there was a main effect for time, with CMJ height being greater at 1 and 10 min post-warm-up (p = 0.0004). Balance ratios and MT improved at 10 min post-warm-up (p < 0.0001). Results indicate that the ASA method can provide ROM improvements for 30 min with either facilitation or no impairment in performance. This may be especially important for athletes who substitute later into a game with minimal time for a full warm-up.

To stretch or not to stretch: the role of stretching in injury prevention and performance

Stretching is commonly practiced before sports participation; however, effects on subsequent performance and injury prevention are not well understood. There is an abundance of literature demonstrating that a single bout of stretching acutely impairs muscle strength, with a lesser effect on power. The extent to which these effects are apparent when stretching is combined with other aspects of a pre-participation warm-up, such as practice drills and low intensity dynamic exercises, is not known. With respect to the effect of pre-participation stretching on injury prevention a limited number of studies of varying quality have shown mixed results. A general consensus is that stretching in addition to warm-up does not affect the incidence of overuse injuries. There is evidence that pre-participation stretching reduces the incidence of muscle strains but there is clearly a need for further work. Future prospective randomized studies should use stretching interventions that are effective at decreasing passive resistance to stretch and assess effects on subsequent injury incidence in sports with a high prevalence of muscle strains.

Acute effects of static and dynamic stretching on leg flexor and extensor isokinetic strength in elite women athletes

The aim of this study was to explore the effects of static and dynamic stretching of the leg flexors and extensors on concentric and eccentric peak torque (PT) and electromyography (EMG) amplitude of the leg extensors and flexors in women athletes. Ten elite women athletes completed the following intervention protocol in a randomized order on separate days: (a) non-stretching (control), (b) static stretching, and (c) dynamic stretching. Stretched muscles were the quadriceps and hamstring muscles. Before and after the stretching or control intervention, concentric and eccentric isokinetic PT and EMG activity of the leg extensors and flexors were measured at 60 and 180 degrees/s. Concentric and eccentric quadriceps and hamstring muscle strength at both test speeds displayed a significant decrease following static stretching (P<0.01-0.001). In contrast, a significant increase was observed after dynamic stretching for these strength parameters (P<0.05-0.001). Parallel to this, normalized EMG amplitude parameters exhibited significant decreases following static (P<0.05-0.001) and significant increases following dynamic stretching (P<0.05-0.001) during quadriceps and hamstring muscle actions at both concentric and eccentric testing modes. Our findings suggest that dynamic stretching, as opposed to static or no stretching, may be an effective technique for enhancing muscle performance during the pre-competition warm-up routine in elite women athletes.

Chronic Static Stretching Improves Exercise Performance

PURPOSE

This study investigated the influence of static stretching exercises on specific exercise performances.

METHODS

Thirty-eight volunteers participated in this study. The stretching group (STR) consisted of 8 males and 11 females whose activity was limited to a 10-wk, 40-min, 3-d.wk(-1) static stretching routine designed to stretch all the major muscle groups in the lower extremity. The control group (CON) consisted of 8 males and 11 females who did not participate in any kind of regular exercise routine during the study. Each subject was measured before and after for flexibility, power (20-m sprint, standing long jump, vertical jump), strength (knee flexion and knee extension one-repetition maximum (1RM)), and strength endurance (number of repetitions at 60% of 1RM for both knee flexion and knee extension).

RESULTS

STR had significant average improvements (P < 0.05) for flexibility (18.1%), standing long jump (2.3%), vertical jump (6.7%), 20-m sprint (1.3%), knee flexion 1RM (15.3%), knee extension 1RM (32.4%), knee flexion endurance (30.4%) and knee extension endurance (28.5%). The control group showed no improvement.

CONCLUSION

This study suggests that chronic static stretching exercises by themselves can improve specific exercise performances. It is possible that persons who are unable to participate in traditional strength training activities may be able to experience gains through stretching, which would allow them to transition into a more traditional exercise regimen.

The Effects of Stretching on Strength Performance

Strength and flexibility are common components of exercise programmes; however, it is not clear how best to include both of these elements in a single training programme. It is common practice among athletes, coaches and recreational exercisers to perform a stretching routine before a strength training session. Stretching exercises are regularly recommended, even in many textbooks, with the claimed purpose of preventing injury and muscle soreness, or even enhancing performance. However, as highlighted in recent review articles, this recommendation lacks scientific evidence. Thus, the purpose of the present review is to determine the acute and chronic effects of stretching on strength performance, together with the underlying mechanisms. Although most studies have found acute decreases in strength following stretching, and that such decreases seem to be more prominent the longer the stretching protocol, the number of exercises and sets, and the duration of each set have, in general, exceeded the ranges normally recommended in the literature. Consequently, the duration of the stimuli were excessively long compared with common practice, thus making evident the need for further studies. In addition, when recommending flexibility exercises, one should consider other underlying issues, such as the safety of the participants, possible increases in injury risks and the unnecessary time expenditure. Many mechanisms underlying stretching exercises still demand investigation so that links between the observed effects, their causes and the consequences may be constructed.