Search

Purpose: Our previous study demonstrated that a single bout of stretching exercises acutely reduced arterial stiffness. We hypothesized that this acute vascular response is due to regional mechanical stimulation of the peripheral arteries. To test this hypothesis, we examined the effect of a single bout of passive one leg stretching on arterial stiffness, comparing the stretched and the non-stretched leg in the same subject., Methods: Twenty-five healthy young men (20.9 ± 0.3 years, 172.5 ± 1.4 cm, 64.1 ± 1.2 kg) volunteered for the study. Subjects underwent a passive calf stretching on one leg (six repetitions of 30-s static stretch with a 10-s recovery). Pulse wave velocity (PWV, an index of arterial stiffness), blood pressure (BP), and heart rate (HR) were measured before and immediately, 15, and 30 min after the stretching., Results: Femoral-ankle PWV (faPWV) in the stretched leg was significantly decreased from baseline (835.0 ± 15.9 cm/s) to immediately (802.9 ± 16.8 cm/s, P < 0.01) and 15 min (810.5 ± 16.0 cm/s, P < 0.01) after the stretching, despite no changes in systolic and diastolic BP, or HR. However, faPWV in the non-stretched leg was not significantly altered at any time. Brachial-ankle PWV (baPWV) also showed similar responses with faPWV, but this response was not significant. Additionally, the passive stretching did not alter carotid-femoral PWV (cfPWV)., Conclusions: These results suggest that mechanical stimulation to peripheral arteries as induced by static passive stretch may modulate arterial wall properties directly, rather than resulting in a systemic effect.

Purpose: This study evaluated the acute effects of two different stretch intensities on muscle damage and extensibility., Methods: Twenty-two physically active women (age 20 ± 1.0 years) were divided into two matched groups and undertook eight sets of 30-s passive hamstring stretching. One group stretched to the point of discomfort (POD) and the other to the point of pain (POP). Hamstring passive torque, sit and reach (S&R), straight leg raise (SLR), and markers of muscle damage were measured before, immediately after stretching and 24 h later., Results: S&R acutely increased and was still increased at 24 h with median (interquartile range) of 2.0 cm (0.5-3.75 cm) and 2.0 cm (0.25-3.0 cm) for POP and POD (p < 0.05), respectively, with no difference between groups; similar changes were seen with SLR. Passive stiffness fully recovered by 24 h and there was no torque deficit. A small, but significant increase in muscle tenderness occurred at 24 h in both groups and there was a very small increase in thigh circumference in both groups which persisted at 24 h in POP. Plasma CK activity was not raised at 24 h., Conclusion: Stretching to the point of pain had no acute advantages over stretching to the discomfort point. Both forms of stretching resulted in very mild muscle tenderness but with no evidence of muscle damage. The increased ROM was not associated with changes in passive stiffness of the muscle but most likely resulted from increased tolerance of the discomfort.

Purpose: It has been suggested that flexibility training may reduce the total volume of training during resistance trainings. The purpose of this study was to compare the effect of flexibility training immediately before resistance training (FLEX-RT) versus resistance training without flexibility training (RT) on maximum strength and the vastus lateralis muscle cross-sectional area (CSA)., Methods: Participants had each leg assigned to RT or FLEX-RT. Both groups performed four sets of leg extensions to voluntary failure of 80% of one repetition maximum (1RM); however, FLEX-RT performed two sets of 25 s of static stretching before resistance training. Number of repetitions and total volume were calculated during weeks 1-5 and 6-10. Vastus lateralis muscle CSA, 1RM, and flexibility were assessed at baseline and after 10 weeks., Results: The number of repetitions and total training volume were greater for RT than FLEX-RT for weeks 1-5 and 6-10. Regarding the vastus lateralis muscle CSA, a main time effect was observed, however, greater change was observed for RT than FLEX-RT (12.7 and 7.4%, respectively). A main time effect for 1RM was also observed with similar changes for RT and FLEX-RT (12.7 and 12.9%, respectively). Flexibility was increased pre- to post-training for FLEX-RT with greater change for FLEX-RT (10.1%) than RT (2.1%)., Conclusion: These results show that performing flexibility training immediately before resistance training can contribute to a lower number of repetitions, total volume, and muscle hypertrophy.

Purpose: Static stretching is used in sport practice but it has been associated with decrements in force and performance. Therefore, we examined the effect of short duration static stretch on the mechano-morphological properties of the m. vastus lateralis (VL) muscle tendon unit (MTU) and on the jumping performance., Methods: Eight males and three females (mean ± SD, 25.5 ± 3.1 years) stretched their lower legs for a 15 or 60 s duration or acted as their own control without stretching in a randomized order. In a pre-post design, a passive movement (5°/s) and a maximum voluntary knee extension contraction (MVC) were performed on dynamometer while the VL tendon and aponeurosis was observed via ultrasound. Furthermore, the participants performed countermovement (CMJ) and squat jumps (SJ)., Results: Repeated measures ANOVA did not show significant differences in MVC, active and passive strain, stiffness, elongation, knee joint angle range, and jump performance between and within groups., Conclusions: The applied stretch stimuli (15 or 60 s) were not sufficient to trigger adaptations in the mechano-morphological properties of the lower extremities MTU which therefore did neither affect jump performance nor MVC. As a possible mechanism, we hypothesized that the dose-time dependency effect of static stretch might have important implications when measuring functional parameters of the MTU and performance. Further examination is necessary to elucidate its impact in the examination of the MTU mechano-morphological properties.

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.

Evidence suggests that static stretching inhibits muscular power. However, research does not reflect practice whereby individuals follow up stretching with secondary activity. This study investigated muscular power following stretching, and after a second bout of activity. Participants (n = 13) completed 3 randomized testing sessions which included a 5 min warm-up, followed by a vertical jump (VJ) on a force platform; an intervention (static stretching, dynamic, or control), followed by a second VJ. Participants then completed a series of movements, followed by a VJ, up to 60 min post activity. Immediately following the intervention, there was a 10.7% difference in VJ between static and dynamic stretching. The second warm up bout increased VJ height following the dynamic intervention, whereas the static stretching condition did not show any differences. The novel finding from this study demonstrates a second exercise bout does not reverse the effects of static stretching and is still detrimental to VJ.