Chronic effects of stretching on range of motion with consideration of potential moderating variables: A systematic review with meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

It is well known that stretch training can induce prolonged increases in joint range of motion (ROM). However, to date more information is needed regarding which training variables might have greater influence on improvements in flexibility. Thus, the purpose of this meta-analysis was to investigate the effects of stretch training on ROM in healthy participants by considering potential moderating variables, such as stretching technique, intensity, duration, frequency, and muscles stretched, as well as sex-specific, age-specific, and/or trained state-specific adaptations to stretch training.

METHODS

We searched through PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and SportDiscus to find eligible studies and, finally, assessed the results from 77 studies and 186 effect sizes by applying a random-effect meta-analysis. Moreover, by applying a mixed-effect model, we performed the respective subgroup analyses. To find potential relationships between stretch duration or age and effect sizes, we performed a meta-regression.

RESULTS

We found a significant overall effect, indicating that stretch training can increase ROM with a moderate effect compared to the controls (effect size = -1.002; Z = -12.074; 95% confidence interval: -1.165 to -0.840; p < 0.001; I2 = 74.97). Subgroup analysis showed a significant difference between the stretching techniques (p = 0.01) indicating that proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation and static stretching produced greater ROM than did ballistic/dynamic stretching. Moreover, there was a significant effect between the sexes (p = 0.04), indicating that females showed higher gains in ROM compared to males. However, further moderating analysis showed no significant relation or difference.

CONCLUSION

When the goal is to maximize ROM in the long term, proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation or static stretching, rather than ballistic/dynamic stretching, should be applied. Something to consider in future research as well as sports practice is that neither volume, intensity, nor frequency of stretching were found to play a significant role in ROM yields.

The Effects of Physical and Mental Fatigue on Time Perception

The perception of time holds a foundational significance regarding how we elucidate the chronological progression of events. While some studies have examined exercise effects on time perception during exercise periods, there are no studies investigating the effects of exercise fatigue on time perception after an exercise intervention. This study investigated the effects of physical and mental fatigue on time estimates over 30 s immediately post-exercise and 6 min post-test. Seventeen volunteers were subjected to three conditions: physical fatigue, mental fatigue, and control. All participants completed a familiarization session and were subjected to three 30 min experimental conditions (control, physical fatigue (cycling at 65% peak power output), and mental fatigue (Stroop task)) on separate days. Time perception, heart rate, and body temperature were recorded pre-test; at the start of the test; 5, 10, 20, 30 seconds into the interventions; post-test; and at the 6 min follow-up. Rating of perceived exertion (RPE) was recorded four times during the intervention. Physical fatigue resulted in a significant (p = 0.001) underestimation of time compared to mental fatigue and control conditions at the post-test and follow-up, with no significant differences between mental fatigue and control conditions. Heart rate, body temperature, and RPE were significantly (all p = 0.001) higher with physical fatigue compared to mental fatigue and control conditions during the intervention and post-test. This study demonstrated that cycling-induced fatigue led to time underestimation compared to mental fatigue and control conditions. It is crucial to consider that physical fatigue has the potential to lengthen an individual's perception of time estimates in sports or work environments.

Relative Cross-Education Training Effects of Male Youth Exceed Male Adults

ABSTRACT

Ben Othman, A, Anvar, SH, Aragão-Santos, JC, Behm, DG, and Chaouachi, A. Relative cross-education training effects of male youth exceed male adults. J Strength Cond Res XX(X): 000-000, 2024-Cross-education has been studied extensively with adults, examining the training effects on contralateral homologous muscles. There is less information on the cross-education effects on contralateral heterologous muscles and scant information comparing these responses between adults and youth. The objective was to compare cross-education training effects in male youth and adults to contralateral homologous and heterologous muscles. Forty-two male children (10-13-years) and 42 adults (18-21-years) were tested before and following an 8-week unilateral, dominant or nondominant arm, chest press (CP) training program or control group (14 subjects each). Unilateral testing assessed dominant and nondominant limb strength with leg press and CP 1 repetition maximum (1RM), knee extensors, elbow extensors (EE), elbow flexors, and handgrip maximum voluntary isometric contraction (MVIC) strength and shot put distance and countermovement jump height. Upper-body tests demonstrated large magnitude increases, with children overall exceeding adults ( p = 0.05- p < 0.0001, η2 : 0.51, 10.4 ± 11.1%). The dominant trained limb showed significantly higher training adaptations than the nondominant limb for the adults with CP 1RM ( p = 0.03, η2 : 0.26, 6.7 ± 11.5%) and EE ( p = 0.008, η2 : 0.27, 8.8 ± 10.3%) MVIC force. Unilateral CP training induced significantly greater training adaptations with the ipsilateral vs. contralateral limb ( p = 0.008, η2 : 0.93, 27.8 ± 12.7%). In conclusion, children demonstrated greater training adaptations than adults, upper-body strength increased with no significant lower-body improvements, and ipsilateral training effects were greater than contralateral training in adults.

Acute Effects of Various Stretching Techniques on Range of Motion: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis

Background

Although stretching can acutely increase joint range of motion (ROM), there are a variety of factors which could influence the extent of stretch-induced flexibility such as participant characteristics, stretching intensities, durations, type (technique), and muscle or joint tested.

Objective

The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to investigate the acute effects of stretching on ROM including moderating variables such as muscles tested, stretch techniques, intensity, sex, and trained state.

Methods

A random-effect meta-analysis was performed from 47 eligible studies (110 effect sizes). A mixed-effect meta-analysis subgroup analysis was also performed on the moderating variables. A meta-regression was also performed between age and stretch duration. GRADE analysis was used to assess the quality of evidence obtained from this meta-analysis.

Results

The meta-analysis revealed a small ROM standard mean difference in favor of an acute bout of stretching compared to non-active control condition (ES = −0.555; Z = −8.939; CI (95%) −0.677 to −0.434; p  < 0.001; I2 = 33.32). While there were ROM increases with sit and reach (P  = 0.038), hamstrings (P  < 0.001), and triceps surae (P  = 0.002) tests, there was no change with the hip adductor test (P  = 0.403). Further subgroup analyses revealed no significant difference in stretch intensity (P  = 0.76), trained state (P  = 0.99), stretching techniques (P  = 0.72), and sex (P  = 0.89). Finally, meta-regression showed no relationship between the ROM standard mean differences to age (R2 = −0.03; P  = 0.56) and stretch duration (R 2 = 0.00; P  = 0.39), respectively. GRADE analysis indicated that we can be moderately confident in the effect estimates.

Conclusion

A single bout of stretching can be considered effective for providing acute small magnitude ROM improvements for most ROM tests, which are not significantly affected by stretch intensity, participants’ trained state, stretching techniques, and sex.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40798-023-00652-x.

The meta-analysis on joint range of motion (ROM) increases revealed a small effect size in favor of an acute bout of stretching compared to the control condition. Subgroup analysis revealed a significant increase in ROM with sit and reach, hamstrings, and triceps surae tests, but no improvement with the hip adductor tests. Whereas all moderating variables presented significant increases in ROM, further subgroup analyses revealed no significant difference in ROM gains with the stretch intensity, trained state of the participants, stretching techniques, and sex. A meta-regression showed no relationship between the effect sizes to age and stretch duration, respectively.

Corticospinal excitability and reflex modulation in a contralateral non-stretched muscle following unilateral stretching

PURPOSE

Muscle stretching effect on the range of motion (ROM) and force deficit in non-stretched muscle, and the underlying mechanisms, is an ongoing issue. This study aimed to investigate crossover stretching effects and mechanisms on the plantar flexor muscles.

METHODS

Fourteen recreationally active females (n = 5) and males (n = 9) performed six sets of 45-s static stretching (SS) (15-s recovery) to the point of discomfort of the dominant leg (DL) plantar flexors or control (345-s rest). Participants were tested for a single 5-s pre- and post-test maximal voluntary isometric contraction (MVIC) with each plantar flexor muscle and were tested for DL and non-DL ROM. They were tested pre- and post-test (immediate, 10-s, 30-s) for the Hoffman (H)-reflex and motor-evoked potentials (MEP) from transcranial magnetic stimulation in the contralateral, non-stretched muscle.

RESULTS

Both the DL and non-DL-MVIC force had large magnitude, significant (↓10.87%, p = 0.027, pƞ2 = 0.4) and non-significant (↓9.53%, p = 0.15, pƞ2 = 0.19) decreases respectively with SS. The SS also significantly improved the DL (6.5%, p < 0.001) and non-DL (5.35%, p = 0.002) ROM. The non-DL MEP/MMax and HMax/MMax ratio did not change significantly.

CONCLUSION

Prolonged static stretching improved the stretched muscle's ROM. However, the stretched limb's force was negatively affected following the stretching protocol. The ROM improvement and large magnitude force impairment (statistically non-significant) were transferred to the contralateral muscles. The lack of significant changes in spinal and corticospinal excitability confirms that the afferent excitability of the spinal motoneurons and corticospinal excitability may not play a substantial role in non-local muscle's ROM or force output responses.

Alternative Flexibility Training

Over the last approximately 20 years, research has reported on performance impairments following prolonged durations of static stretching. This has led to a paradigm shift towards dynamic stretching. There has also been a greater emphasis using foam rollers, vibration devices, and other techniques. Recent commentaries and meta-analyses suggest that stretching need not be listed as a fitness component as other activities such as resistance training can provide similar range of motion benefits. The commentary aims to review and compare the effects of static stretching and alternative exercises for improving range of motion.

Are Acute Effects of Foam-Rolling Attributed to Dynamic Warm Up Effects? A Comparative Study

Over the last decade, acute increases in range of motion (ROM) in response to foam rolling (FR) have been frequently reported. Compared to stretching, FR-induced ROM increases were not typically accompanied by a performance (e.g., force, power, endurance) deficit. Consequently, the inclusion of FR in warm-up routines was frequently recommended, especially since literature pointed out non-local ROM increases after FR. However, to attribute ROM increases to FR it must be ensured that such adaptations do not occur as a result of simple warm-up effects, as significant increases in ROM can also be assumed as a result of active warm-up routines. To answer this research question, 20 participants were recruited using a cross-over design. They performed 4x45 seconds hamstrings rolling under two conditions; FR, and sham rolling (SR) using a roller board to imitate the foam rolling movement without the pressure of the foam rolling. They were also tested in a control condition. Effects on ROM were tested under passive, active dynamic as well as ballistic conditions. Moreover, to examine non-local effects the knee to wall test (KtW) was used. Results showed that both interventions provided significant, moderate to large magnitude increases in passive hamstrings ROM and KtW respectively, compared to the control condition (p = 0.007-0.041, d = 0.62-0.77 and p = 0.002-0.006, d = 0.79-0.88, respectively). However, the ROM increases were not significantly different between the FR and the SR condition (p = 0.801, d = 0.156 and p = 0.933, d = 0.09, respectively). No significant changes could be obtained under the active dynamic (p = 0.65) while there was a significant decrease in the ballistic testing condition with a time effect (p < 0.001). Thus, it can be assumed that potential acute increases in ROM cannot be exclusively attributed to FR. It is therefore speculated that warm up effects could be responsible independent of FR or imitating the rolling movement, which indicates there is no additive effect of FR or SR to the dynamic or ballistic range of motion.

Resistance Training Induces Improvements in Range of Motion: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Although it is known that resistance training can be as effective as stretch training to increase joint range of motion, to date no comprehensive meta-analysis has investigated the effects of resistance training on range of motion with all its potential affecting variables.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this systematic review with meta-analysis was to evaluate the effect of chronic resistance training on range of motion compared either to a control condition or stretch training or to a combination of resistance training and stretch training to stretch training, while assessing moderating variables.

DESIGN

For the main analysis, a random-effect meta-analysis was used and for the subgroup analysis a mixed-effect model was implemented. Whilst subgroup analyses included sex and participants' activity levels, meta-regression included age, frequency, and duration of resistance training.

DATA SOURCES

Following the systematic search in four databases (PubMed, Scopus, SPORTDiscus, and Web of Science) and reference lists, 55 studies were found to be eligible.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Controlled or randomized controlled trials that separately compared the training effects of resistance training exercises with either a control group, stretching group, or combined stretch and resistance training group on range of motion in healthy participants.

RESULTS

Resistance training increased range of motion (effect size [ES] = 0.73; p < 0.001) with the exception of no significant range of motion improvement with resistance training using only body mass. There were no significant differences between resistance training versus stretch training (ES = 0.08; p = 0.79) or between resistance training and stretch training versus stretch training alone (ES = - 0.001; p = 0.99). Although "trained or active people" increased range of motion (ES = 0.43; p < 0.001) "untrained and sedentary" individuals had significantly (p = 0.005) higher magnitude range of motion changes (ES = 1.042; p < 0.001). There were no detected differences between sex and contraction type. Meta-regression showed no effect of age, training duration, or frequency.

CONCLUSIONS

As resistance training with external loads can improve range of motion, stretching prior to or after resistance training may not be necessary to enhance flexibility.

Lack of Evidence for Crossover Fatigue with Plantar Flexor Muscles

The occurrence and mechanisms underlying non-local or crossover muscle fatigue is an ongoing issue. This study aimed to investigate crossover fatigue of the plantar flexor muscles. Sixteen recreationally active males (n = 6) and females (n = 10) visited the laboratory for four sessions and performed a single 5-s pre-test maximal voluntary isometric contraction (MVIC) with each plantar flexors muscle. Thereafter, the fatigue intervention involved two 100-s MVICs (60-s recovery) with their dominant plantar flexors or rested for 260-s (control). Subsequently, in two separate sessions, Hoffman reflexes (H-reflex) were evoked in the non-dominant, non-exercised, leg before and following the dominant leg fatigue or control intervention (Fatigue-Reflex and Control-Reflex conditions). MVIC forces and volitional (V)-waves were monitored in the non-dominant leg in the other two sessions (Fatigue-MVIC and Control-MVIC) before and after the intervention (fatigue or control) as well as during 12 repeated MVICs and immediately thereafter. Despite the force reduction in the dominant leg (42.4%, p = 0.002), no crossover force deficit with single (F_(1,9) = 0.02, p = 0.88, pƞ² = 0.003) or repeated (F_(1,9) = 0.006, p = 0.93, pƞ² = 0.001) MVIC testing were observed. The H-reflex did not change after the fatigue (F_(1,7) = 0.51; p = 0.49; pƞ² = 0.06) or repeated MVICs (F_(1,8) = 0.27; p = 0.61; pƞ² = 0.03). There were also no crossover effects of fatigue on the V-wave with single (F_(1,8) = 3.71, p = 0.09, pƞ² = 0.31) or repeated MVICs (F_(1,6) = 1.45, p = 0.27, pƞ² = 0.19). Crossover fatigue was not evident with the plantar flexors nor any significant changes in H-reflex and V-waves in the soleus muscle. This finding suggests that crossover fatigue may not necessarily occur in slow-twitch predominant muscle groups.

Non-local Acute Passive Stretching Effects on Range of Motion in Healthy Adults: A Systematic Review with Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Stretching a muscle not only increases the extensibility or range of motion (ROM) of the stretched muscle or joint but there is growing evidence of increased ROM of contralateral and other non-local muscles and joints.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this meta-analysis was to quantify crossover or non-local changes in passive ROM following an acute bout of unilateral stretching and to examine potential dose-response relations.

METHODS

Eleven studies involving 14 independent measures met the inclusion criteria. The meta-analysis included moderating variables such as sex, trained state, stretching intensity and duration.

RESULTS

The analysis revealed that unilateral passive static stretching induced moderate magnitude (standard mean difference within studies: SMD: 0.86) increases in passive ROM with non-local, non-stretched joints. Moderating variables such as sex, trained state, stretching intensity, and duration did not moderate the results. Although stretching duration did not present statistically significant differences, greater than 240-s of stretching (SMD: 1.24) exhibited large magnitude increases in non-local ROM compared to moderate magnitude improvements with shorter (< 120-s: SMD: 0.72) durations of stretching.

CONCLUSION

Passive static stretching of one muscle group can induce moderate magnitude, global increases in ROM. Stretching durations greater than 240 s may have larger effects compared with shorter stretching durations.

Foam Rolling Prescription: A Clinical Commentary

Behm, DG, Alizadeh, S, Hadjizadeh Anvar, S, Mahmoud, MMI, Ramsay, E, Hanlon, C, and Cheatham, S. Foam rolling prescription: a clinical commentary. J Strength Cond Res 34(11): 3301-3308, 2020-Although the foam rolling and roller massage literature generally reports acute increases in range of motion (ROM) with either trivial or small performance improvements, there is little information regarding appropriate rolling prescription. The objective of this literature review was to appraise the evidence and provide the best prescriptive recommendations for rolling to improve ROM and performance. The recommendations represent studies with the greatest magnitude effect size increases in ROM and performance. A systematic search of the rolling-related literature found in PubMed, ScienceDirect, Web of Science, and Google Scholar was conducted using related terms such as foam rolling, roller massage, ROM, flexibility, performance, and others. From the measures within articles that monitored ROM (25), strength (41), jump (41), fatigue (67), and sprint (62) variables; regression correlations and predictive quadratic equations were formulated for number of rolling sets, repetition frequency, set duration, and rolling intensity. The analysis revealed the following conclusions. To achieve the greatest ROM, the regression equations predicted rolling prescriptions involving 1-3 sets of 2-4-second repetition duration (time for a single roll in one direction over the length of a body part) with a total rolling duration of 30-120-second per set. Based on the fewer performance measures, there were generally trivial to small magnitude decreases in strength and jump measures. In addition, there was insufficient evidence to generalize on the effects of rolling on fatigue and sprint measures. In summary, relatively small volumes of rolling can improve ROM with generally trivial to small effects on strength and jump performance.