The acute effects of stretching with vibration on dynamic flexibility in young female gymnasts

What We Do Not Know About Stretching in Healthy Athletes: A Scoping Review with Evidence Gap Map from 300 Trials

BACKGROUND

Stretching has garnered significant attention in sports sciences, resulting in numerous studies. However, there is no comprehensive overview on investigation of stretching in healthy athletes.

OBJECTIVES

To perform a systematic scoping review with an evidence gap map of stretching studies in healthy athletes, identify current gaps in the literature, and provide stakeholders with priorities for future research.

METHODS

Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 and PRISMA-ScR guidelines were followed. We included studies comprising healthy athletes exposed to acute and/or chronic stretching interventions. Six databases were searched (CINAHL, EMBASE, PubMed, Scopus, SPORTDiscus, and Web of Science) until 1 January 2023. The relevant data were narratively synthesized; quantitative data summaries were provided for key data items. An evidence gap map was developed to offer an overview of the existing research and relevant gaps.

RESULTS

Of ~ 220,000 screened records, we included 300 trials involving 7080 athletes [mostly males (~ 65% versus ~ 20% female, and ~ 15% unreported) under 36 years of age; tiers 2 and 3 of the Participant Classification Framework] across 43 sports. Sports requiring extreme range of motion (e.g., gymnastics) were underrepresented. Most trials assessed the acute effects of stretching, with chronic effects being scrutinized in less than 20% of trials. Chronic interventions averaged 7.4 ± 5.1 weeks and never exceeded 6 months. Most trials (~ 85%) implemented stretching within the warm-up, with other application timings (e.g., post-exercise) being under-researched. Most trials examined static active stretching (62.3%), followed by dynamic stretching (38.3%) and proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation (PNF) stretching (12.0%), with scarce research on alternative methods (e.g., ballistic stretching). Comparators were mostly limited to passive controls, with ~ 25% of trials including active controls (e.g., strength training). The lower limbs were primarily targeted by interventions (~ 75%). Reporting of dose was heterogeneous in style (e.g., 10 repetitions versus 10 s for dynamic stretching) and completeness of information (i.e., with disparities in the comprehensiveness of the provided information). Most trials (~ 90%) reported performance-related outcomes (mainly strength/power and range of motion); sport-specific outcomes were collected in less than 15% of trials. Biomechanical, physiological, and neural/psychological outcomes were assessed sparsely and heterogeneously; only five trials investigated injury-related outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

There is room for improvement, with many areas of research on stretching being underexplored and others currently too heterogeneous for reliable comparisons between studies. There is limited representation of elite-level athletes (~ 5% tier 4 and no tier 5) and underpowered sample sizes (≤ 20 participants). Research was biased toward adult male athletes of sports not requiring extreme ranges of motion, and mostly assessed the acute effects of static active stretching and dynamic stretching during the warm-up. Dose-response relationships remain largely underexplored. Outcomes were mostly limited to general performance testing. Injury prevention and other effects of stretching remain poorly investigated. These relevant research gaps should be prioritized by funding policies.

REGISTRATION

OSF project ( https://osf.io/6auyj/ ) and registration ( https://osf.io/gu8ya ).

Examining the Influence of Warm-Up Static and Dynamic Stretching, as well as Post-Activation Potentiation Effects, on the Acute Enhancement of Gymnastic Performance: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis

The primary objective of this systematic review with meta-analysis is to methodically discern and compare the impact of diverse warm-up strategies, including both static and dynamic stretching, as well as post-activation potentiation techniques, on the immediate performance of gymnasts. Adhering to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, this paper evaluated studies that examined the gymnasts' performance after different warm-up strategies namely stretching (static [SS] or dynamic), vibration platforms (VP) or post-activation, in comparison to control conditions (e.g., mixed warm-up routines; no warm-up). The principal outcomes were centered on technical performance metrics (e.g., split, gymnastic jumps) and physical performance metrics (e.g., squat jump, countermovement jump, drop jump, balance, range of motion). Methodological assessments of the included studies were conducted using the Downs and Black Checklist. From the initial search across PubMed, Scopus, and the Web of Science databases, a total of 591 titles were retrieved, and 19 articles were ultimately incorporated in the analysis. The results revealed a non-significant differences (p > 0.05) between the SS condition and control conditions in squat jump performance, countermovement jump and gymnastic technical performance (e.g., split; split jump). Despite the difference in warm-up strategies and outcomes analyzed, the results suggest that there is no significant impairment of lower-limb power after SS. Additionally, technical elements dependent on flexibility appear to be enhanced by SS. Conversely, dynamic stretching and VP seem to be more effective for augmenting power-related and dynamic performance in gymnasts.

High-impact Routines to Ameliorate Trunk and Lower Limbs Flexibility in Women

Several types of routines and methods have been experimented to gain neuro/muscular advantages, in terms of overall range of motion, in athletes and fitness enthusiasts. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the impact of different routines on trunk- and lower limbs flexibility in a sample of young women. In a randomized-crossover fashion, eleven subjects underwent to: hamstrings stretching [S]; hamstrings stretching plus whole-body vibration [S+WBV]; partial-body cryotherapy [Cryo]; rest [Control]. Standing hamstrings stretch performance and sit-and-reach amplitude resulted to be improved with [S+WBV] compared to all other protocols (p<0.05). [Cryo] ameliorated the active knee extension performance with respect to all other interventions (p<0.05). These flexibility improvements were obtained without a loss in the trunk position sense proprioception. These results represent the first evidence that a single session of either vibration or cryotherapy can ameliorate flexibility without losing the trunk position sense proprioception in young women.