Journal of sport and health science/Journal of Sport and Health Science· 2024Q1· Review
Revisiting the stretch-induced force deficit: A systematic review with multilevel meta-analysis of acute effects
- 34citations
- Q1SCImago
- 2024year
Short summary
A meta-analysis of 83 studies (2012 participants) found static stretching does not negatively impact general athletic performance, and may even improve jumping performance (ES = 0.15, p = 0.006) in adults, contradicting prior recommendations to exclude it from warm-ups.
AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.
Key points
- Static stretching did not negatively influence general athletic performance compared to passive or active controls.
- A positive effect on subsequent jumping performance was found in adults (ES = 0.15, p = 0.006).
- Significant, small maximal strength loss was observed with static stretching (ES = -0.21, p = 0.003) compared to passive controls.
- Longer stretching durations (≥60s per bout) showed high magnitude ES for strength loss (ES = -0.84, p = 0.004) vs. passive controls.
AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.
Abstract
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.
The authors' abstract, as published at the source. Journal of sport and health science/Journal of Sport and Health Science, 2024 · DOI ↗
Continue with a free account
Ask the paper: 3 free questions a day about this paper; save it, get its citation, new summaries every day for your field. Takeaways are Premium.
Continue free on the webSign in with Google or Apple; no card needed. You come back to this paper.
On your phone:
Field: Orthopedics and Sports Medicine
Orthopedics and Sports MedicineMedicine