Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Comparison of resistance training vs static stretching on flexibility and maximal strength in healthy physically active adults, a randomized controlled trial.
Rosenfeldt, Morten; Stien, Nicolay; Behm, David G; Saeterbakken, Atle Hole; Andersen, Vidar.
Affiliation
  • Rosenfeldt M; Faculty of Education, Arts and Sports, Western Norway University of Applied Sciences, PB 133, Sogndal, 6851, Norway.
  • Stien N; Faculty of Education, Arts and Sports, Western Norway University of Applied Sciences, PB 133, Sogndal, 6851, Norway.
  • Behm DG; School of Human Kinetics and Recreation, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's, Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada.
  • Saeterbakken AH; Faculty of Education, Arts and Sports, Western Norway University of Applied Sciences, PB 133, Sogndal, 6851, Norway.
  • Andersen V; Faculty of Education, Arts and Sports, Western Norway University of Applied Sciences, PB 133, Sogndal, 6851, Norway. Vidar.andersen@hvl.no.
BMC Sports Sci Med Rehabil ; 16(1): 142, 2024 Jun 28.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38943165
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

The aim of the present study was to compare the effects of resistance training through full range of motion and static stretching (SS) of the hip and lower back extensors on flexibility and strength in healthy, physically active, adults.

METHODS:

Eighteen participants (age 24.2 ± 3.0 years, body mass 71.3 ± 8.9 kg, height 172.8 ± 7.5 cm) were randomly assigned to either a Resistance Training (RT) (n = 6), SS (n = 6), or control (CON) group (n = 6). The sit & reach (S&R) flexibility test and maximum isometric straight legged deadlift (ISLDL) at 95% and 50% range of motion (ROM) were tested pre- and post-intervention with significance set at p < 0.05. Both groups conducted four to eight sets per session. Within each set, the RT group performed eight repetitions each lasting four seconds, while the SS group stretched continuously for 32 s. The rest periods between each set were 60-90 s. Consequently training volume and rest times were matched between the groups.

RESULTS:

The RT and SS groups achieved significant, large magnitude improvements in the S&R test compared to the CON group (p < 0.01 g = 2.53 and p = 0.01, g = 2.44), but no differences were observed between the RT and SS groups (p = 1.00). Furthermore, the RT group demonstrated a larger improvement in 50% and 95% ROM ISLDL compared to SS (p < 0.01, g = 2.69-3.36) and CON (p < 0.01, g = 2.44-2.57).

CONCLUSION:

Resistance training through a full ROM was equally effective as SS for improving S&R flexibility, but improved hip- and lower back extensor strength more than SS and the CON. The authors recommend using large ROM resistance training to improve hip and lower back extensor flexibility and muscle strength. TRIAL REGISTRATION ISRCTN88839251, registered 24. April 2024, Retrospectively registered.
Key words

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Language: En Journal: BMC Sports Sci Med Rehabil Year: 2024 Document type: Article Affiliation country: Norway

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Language: En Journal: BMC Sports Sci Med Rehabil Year: 2024 Document type: Article Affiliation country: Norway