Acute Effects of Stretching on Leg and Vertical Stiffness During Treadmill Running

Effect of different resistance increments during warm-up on the snatch performance of male weightlifters

This study investigated the effect of different resistance increments during warm-up on snatch performance of male weightlifters. Nine male college weightlifters were recruited. The 3 warm-up protocols were performed every 7 days with a randomized order: 1. Power snatch exercise with 10 % resistance increment (50 %, 60 %, 70 %, and 80 % of one-repetition maximum); 2. Power snatch exercise with 15 % resistance increment (50 %, 65 %, and 80 % of one-repetition maximum); 3. Self-selected resistance increment. Participants were tested based on 85 % maximum weight snatch after warm-up. Snatch performance was measured using peak vertical ground reaction force. Postural stability was measured using center-of-pressure displacement. Activation of seven shoulder, back, and leg muscles was measured using electromyography on the dominant side. In snatch performance, the 10 % increment protocol had a significantly higher peak vertical ground reaction force during the second-pull phase than the 15 % increment (d = 0.92, p < 0.05) and self-selected (d = 1.32, p < 0.05) protocols. In postural stability, no significant differences in center-of-pressure displacement among the three protocols were observed. For muscle activation, the 10 % increment protocol resulted in significantly higher activation of shoulder (d = 1.2-2.2, p < 0.05) during the second-pull phase than the other two protocols and higher activation of hip muscles (d = 1.73, p < 0.05) than self-selected protocol. To conclude, a warm-up protocol combining slow progression is preferable in improving power output during snatch in male weightlifters, probably through facilitating the activation of proximal limb muscles. It can enhance training quality while potentially reducing the risk of sports injuries.

Dynamic and static stretching on hamstring flexibility and stiffness: A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Hamstring injuries are one of the most common types of damage in sports. Insufficient flexibility and high stiffness are important reasons for it. Stretching is often used in warm-up activities before exercises to increase flexibility, among which dynamic stretching (DS) and static stretching (SS) are the most widely used. The effects of these two stretching techniques on the flexibility or stiffness of the hamstring still need to be clarified.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to compare the short-term, medium-term, and long-term effects of DS and SS on improving hamstring flexibility and stiffness via a meta-analysis of RCTs.

METHODS

RCTs were identified from PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and PEDro from inception to July 28, 2022. The methodological quality was evaluated using the PEDro scale. The mean difference and 95% confidence interval of the outcome variables before and after stretching were calculated and the extracted data were quantitatively processed using a random or fixed effects model.

RESULTS

A total of 27 RCTs and 606 participants were included. In terms of improving the ROM of the hamstring, there was no significant difference in the acute (MD, -0.70, 95% CI, -1.54 to 0.14; Z = 1.63, P > 0.05) and sub-acute effects (MD, 1.71, 95% CI, -2.80 to 6.22; Z = 0.74, P > 0.05) between a single bout of SS and DS, while the acute (MD, -5.13, 95% CI, -7.65 to -2.61; Z = 3.99, P < 0.05) and sub-acute effects (MD, -5.30, 95% CI, -6.33 to -4.27; Z = 10.04, P < 0.05) of multiple bouts of SS was superior to DS; There was no significant difference in the medium-term effect between the two stretching techniques (MD, 3.48, 95% CI, -2.57 to 9.53; Z = 1.13, P > 0.05), but the long-term effect of SS was better than DS (MD, - 10.40, 95% CI, -10.97 to -9.83; Z = 35.57, P < 0.05). Regarding the length of the hamstring, the acute (MD, -0.41, 95% CI, -1.09 to 0.26; Z = 1.20, P > 0.05) and sub-acute effects (MD, -0.73, 95% CI, -1.69 to 0.22; Z = 1.51, P > 0.05) of a single bout of DS and SS were similar. Two studies have compared the effects on hamstring stiffness, with one showing similar effects, and the other showed that DS was superior to SS. One study showed no difference in the magnitude of change in improving passive torque. No studies explored the effect of DS and SS on hamstring myofascial length. Only one study demonstrated no significant difference in hamstring thickness.

CONCLUSIONS

A single bout of DS and SS have similar short-term effects in improving hamstring ROM and length, while multiple bouts of SS can significantly improve hamstring ROM compared to DS. DS and SS showed similar effects on hamstring myofascial length.

Influence of dynamic stretching on ankle joint stiffness, vertical stiffness and running economy during treadmill running

The purpose of the present study was to investigate whether and how dynamic stretching of the plantarflexors may influence running economy. A crossover design with a minimum of 48 h between experimental (dynamic stretching) and control conditions was used. Twelve recreational runners performed a step-wise incremental protocol to the limit of tolerance on a motorised instrumented treadmill. The initial speed was 2.3 m/s, followed by increments of 0.2 m/s every 3 min. Dynamic joint stiffness, vertical stiffness and running kinematics during the initial stage of the protocol were calculated. Running economy was evaluated using online gas-analysis. For each participant, the minimum number of stages completed before peak O2 uptake (V̇O2peak) common to the two testing conditions was used to calculate the gradient of a linear regression line between V̇O2 (y-axis) and speed (x-axis). The number of stages, which ranged between 4 and 8, was used to construct individual subject regression equations. Non-clinical forms of magnitude-based decision method were used to assess outcomes. The dynamic stretching protocol resulted in a possible decrease in dynamic ankle joint stiffness (−10.7%; 90% confidence limits ±16.1%), a possible decrease in vertical stiffness (−2.3%, ±4.3%), a possibly beneficial effect on running economy (−4.0%, ±8.3%), and very likely decrease in gastrocnemius medialis muscle activation (−27.1%, ±39.2%). The results indicate that dynamic stretching improves running economy, possibly via decreases in dynamic joint and vertical stiffness and muscle activation. Together, these results imply that dynamic stretching should be recommended as part of the warm-up for running training in recreational athletes examined in this study.

Acute Effects of Whole-Body Vibration Warm-up on Leg and Vertical Stiffness During Running

ABSTRACT

Paradisis, GP, Pappas, P, Dallas, G, Zacharogiannis, E, Rossi, J, and Lapole, T. Acute effects of whole-body vibration warm-up on leg and vertical stiffness during running. J Strength Cond Res 35(9): 2433-2438, 2021-Although whole-body vibration (WBV) has been suggested as a suitable and efficient alternative to the classic warm-up routines, it is still unknown how this may impact running mechanics. Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate the effect of a WBV warm-up procedure on lower-limb stiffness and other spatiotemporal variables during running at submaximal speed. Twenty-two males performed 30-second running bouts at 4.44 m·s-1 on a treadmill before and after a WBV and control warm-up protocols. The WBV protocol (vibration frequency: 50 Hz, peak-to-peak displacement: 4 mm) consisted of 10 sets of 30-second dynamic squatting exercises with 30-second rest periods within sets. Leg and vertical stiffness values were calculated using the spring mass model. The results indicated significant increases only after the WBV protocol for leg stiffness (3.4%), maximal ground reaction force (1.9%), and flight time (4.7%). Consequently, the WBV warm-up protocol produced a change in running mechanics, suggesting a shift toward a more aerial pattern. The functional significance of such WBV-induced changes needs further investigation to clearly determine whether it may influence running economy and peak velocity.

Effects of Dynamic Stretching Combined With Static Stretching, Foam Rolling, or Vibration Rolling as a Warm-Up Exercise on Athletic Performance in Elite Table Tennis Players

CONTEXT

Warm-up exercise is an essential preexercise routine for athletes to optimize performance. However, the benefits of combined warm-up protocols remain unclear.

OBJECTIVE

This comparative study investigated the acute effects of dynamic stretching (DS) followed by static stretching (SS), self-myofascial release using a foam rolling (FR) device, or vibration foam rolling (VFR) as a warm-up exercise to improve flexibility, power, agility, and specific skills in elite table tennis players.

DESIGN

A crossover study.

SETTING

University.

PARTICIPANTS

Twenty-three elite table tennis players.

INTERVENTIONS

Players completed 3 different interventions in a random order (DS + SS, DS + FR, and DS + VFR). The target muscle groups included the bilateral posterior calf, posterior thigh, anterior thigh, back, and shoulder.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Sit-and-reach test for flexibility, board jump test for lower-extremity power, medicine ball throw test for upper-extremity power, Edgren Side Step Test for agility, and ball speed of table tennis was assessed before and after intervention.

RESULTS

After intervention, significant increases in flexibility (15.2%, 20.4%, and 23.8%); lower-limb power (4.5%, 6.6%, and 6.3%); upper-limb power (9.6%, 8.5%, and 9.1%); and ball speed (7.4%, 7.6%, and 7.7%) were observed for DS + SS, DS + FR, and DS + VFR, respectively (all P < .001). In addition, only DS coupled with FR (5.1%) and DS in conjunction with VFR (2.7%) significantly improved agility (P < .001). However, no significant improvements in agility were observed after DS + SS. In addition, no one protocol was superior to the other in all outcomes.

CONCLUSION

The authors suggest that a combination of DS with FR or VFR as warm-up exercises significantly improved flexibility, power, ball speed, in addition to agility in elite table tennis players. Coach and athletic professionals may take this information into account for choosing more effective warm-up protocols to enhance performance.

Acute Effects of Dynamic Stretching on Muscle Flexibility and Performance: An Analysis of the Current Literature

Stretching has long been used in many physical activities to increase range of motion (ROM) around a joint. Stretching also has other acute effects on the neuromuscular system. For instance, significant reductions in maximal voluntary strength, muscle power or evoked contractile properties have been recorded immediately after a single bout of static stretching, raising interest in other stretching modalities. Thus, the effects of dynamic stretching on subsequent muscular performance have been questioned. This review aimed to investigate performance and physiological alterations following dynamic stretching. There is a substantial amount of evidence pointing out the positive effects on ROM and subsequent performance (force, power, sprint and jump). The larger ROM would be mainly attributable to reduced stiffness of the muscle-tendon unit, while the improved muscular performance to temperature and potentiation-related mechanisms caused by the voluntary contraction associated with dynamic stretching. Therefore, if the goal of a warm-up is to increase joint ROM and to enhance muscle force and/or power, dynamic stretching seems to be a suitable alternative to static stretching. Nevertheless, numerous studies reporting no alteration or even performance impairment have highlighted possible mitigating factors (such as stretch duration, amplitude or velocity). Accordingly, ballistic stretching, a form of dynamic stretching with greater velocities, would be less beneficial than controlled dynamic stretching. Notwithstanding, the literature shows that inconsistent description of stretch procedures has been an important deterrent to reaching a clear consensus. In this review, we highlight the need for future studies reporting homogeneous, clearly described stretching protocols, and propose a clarified stretching terminology and methodology.

Effects of a capacitive-resistive electric transfer therapy on physiological and biomechanical parameters in recreational runners: A randomized controlled crossover trial

OBJECTIVES

This study compared the effects of a capacitive-resistive electric transfer therapy (Tecar) and passive rest on physiological and biomechanical parameters in recreational runners when performed shortly after an exhausting training session.

DESIGN

Randomized controlled crossover trial.

SETTING

University biomechanical research laboratory.

PARTICIPANTS

Fourteen trained male runners MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Physiological (running economy, oxygen uptake, respiratory exchange ratio, ventilation, heart rate, blood lactate concentration) and biomechanical (step length; stride angle, height, frequency, and contact time; swing time; contact phase; support phase; push-off phase) parameters were measured during two incremental treadmill running tests performed two days apart after an exhaustive training session.

RESULTS

When running at 14 km/h and 16 km/h, the Tecar treatment group presented greater increases in stride length (p < 0.001), angle (p < 0.05) and height (p < 0.001) between the first and second tests than the control group and, accordingly, greater decreases in stride frequency (p < 0.05). Physiological parameters were similar between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The present study suggests that a Tecar therapy intervention enhances biomechanical parameters in recreational runners after an exhaustive training session more than passive rest, generating a more efficient running pattern without affecting selected physiological parameters.