Critical evaluation and recalculation of current systematic reviews with meta-analysis on the effects of acute and chronic stretching on passive properties and passive peak torque.

PURPOSE: Muscle, tendon, and muscle-tendon unit (MTU) stiffness as well as passive peak torque (PPT) or delayed stretching pain sensation are typical explanatory approaches for stretching adaptations. However, in literature, differences in the study inclusion, as well as applying meta-analytical models without accounting for intrastudy dependency of multiple and heteroscedasticity of data bias the current evidence. Furthermore, most of the recent analyses neglected to investigate PPT adaptations and further moderators. METHODS: The presented review used the recommended meta-analytical calculation method to investigate the effects of stretching on stiffness as well as on passive torque parameters using subgroup analyses for stretching types, stretching duration, and supervision. RESULTS: Chronic stretching reduced muscle stiffness ( - 0.38, p = 0.01) overall, and also for the supervised ( - 0.49, p = 0.004) and long static stretching interventions ( - 0.61, p < 0.001), while the unsupervised and short duration subgroups did not reach the level of significance (p = 0.21, 0.29). No effects were observed for tendon stiffness or for subgroups (e.g., long-stretching durations). Chronic PPT (0.55, p = 0.005) in end ROM increased. Only long-stretching durations sufficiently decreased muscle stiffness acutely. No effects could be observed for acute PPT. CONCLUSION: While partially in accordance with previous literature, the results underline the relevance of long-stretching durations when inducing changes in passive properties. Only four acute PPT in end ROM studies were eligible, while a large number were excluded as they provided mathematical models and/or lacked control conditions, calling for further randomized controlled trials on acute PPT effects.

Revisiting the stretch-induced force deficit: A systematic review with multilevel meta-analysis of acute effects.

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.

Stressing the Relevance of Differentiating between Systematic and Random Measurement Errors in Ultrasound Muscle Thickness Diagnostics.

BACKGROUND: The majority of studies that explore changes in musculature following resistance training interventions or examine atrophy due to immobilization or sarcopenia use ultrasound imaging. While most studies assume acceptable to excellent reliability, there seems to be unawareness of the existing absolute measurement errors. As early as 1998, methodological research addressed a collective unawareness of the random measurement error and its practical indications. Referring to available methodological approaches, within this work, we point out the limited value of focusing on relative, correlation-based reliability indices for the interpretability in scientific research but also for clinical application by assessing 1,512 muscle thickness values from more than 400 ultrasound images. To account for intra- and inter-day repeatability, data were collected on two consecutive days within four testing sessions. Commonly-stated reliability values (ICC, CV, SEM and MDC) were calculated, while evidence-based agreement analyses were applied to provide the accompanied systematic and random measurement error. RESULTS: While ICCs in the range of 0.832 to 0.998 are in accordance with the available literature, the mean absolute percentage error ranges from 1.34 to 20.38% and the mean systematic bias from 0.78 to 4.01 mm (all p ≤ 0.013), depending on the measurement time points chosen for data processing. CONCLUSIONS: In accordance with prior literature, a more cautious interpretation of relative reliability values should be based on included systematic and random absolute measurement scattering. Lastly, this paper discusses the rationale for including different measurement error statistics when determining the validity of pre-post changes, thus, accounting for the certainty of evidence.

Effects of Stretching or Strengthening Exercise on Spinal and Lumbopelvic Posture: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Abnormal posture (e.g. loss of lordosis) has been associated with the occurrence of musculoskeletal pain. Stretching tight muscles while strengthening the antagonists represents the most common method to treat the assumed muscle imbalance. However, despite its high popularity, there is no quantitative synthesis of the available evidence examining the effectiveness of the stretch-and-strengthen approach. METHODS: A systematic review with meta-analysis was conducted, searching PubMed, Web of Science and Google Scholar. We included controlled clinical trials investigating the effects of stretching or strengthening on spinal and lumbopelvic posture (e.g., pelvic tilt, lumbar lordosis, thoracic kyphosis, head tilt) in healthy individuals. Effect sizes were pooled using robust variance estimation. To rate the certainty about the evidence, the GRADE approach was applied. RESULTS: A total of 23 studies with 969 participants were identified. Neither acute (d = 0.01, p = 0.97) nor chronic stretching (d=-0.19, p = 0.16) had an impact on posture. Chronic strengthening was associated with large improvements (d=-0.83, p = 0.01), but no study examined acute effects. Strengthening was superior (d = 0.81, p = 0.004) to stretching. Sub-analyses found strengthening to be effective in the thoracic and cervical spine (d=-1.04, p = 0.005) but not in the lumbar and lumbopelvic region (d=-0.23, p = 0.25). Stretching was ineffective in all locations (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Moderate-certainty evidence does not support the use of stretching as a treatment of muscle imbalance. In contrast, therapists should focus on strengthening programs targeting weakened muscles.

Acute and chronic effects of stretching on balance: a systematic review with multilevel meta-analysis.

Introduction: Balance is a multifactorial construct with high relevance in, e.g., everyday life activities. Apart from sensorimotor control, muscle strength and size are positively linked with balance performance. While commonly trained for via resistance training, stretch training has emerged as a potential substitution in specific conditions. However, no review has investigated potential effects of stretching on balance, yet. Methods: PubMed, Web of Science and Scopus were searched with inception to February, 2024. Studies were included if they examined acute and/or chronic effects of any stretching type against passive and/or active controls on balance parameters - without any population-related restrictions concerning sex/gender, age, health status, activity level. Methodological quality was assessed using PEDro scale. Meta-analyses were performed if two or more studies reported on the same outcome. Certainty of evidence was determined based on GRADE criteria. Results: Eighteen acute and eleven chronic effect studies were included. Stretching studies exhibited significant improvements for sway parameters with eyes open against passive controls of moderate magnitude for chronic (ES: 0.63, p = 0.047) and of small magnitude for acute studies (ES: 0.21, p = 0.032). Most other subgroups against passive controls as well as actively-controlled comparisons resulted in trivial and/or non-significant effects. Conclusion: Even though some pooled effects slightly reached the level of significance, the overall results are biased by (very) low certainty of evidence (GRADE criteria downgrading for risk of bias, imprecision, publication bias). Moderators suggested by literature (strength, muscle size, flexibility, proprioception) were rarely assessed, which prevents conclusive final statements and calls for further, high quality evidence to clarify potential mechanisms-if any exist.

Resistance Training Causes the Stretch-Induced Force Deficit-A Randomized Cross-Over Study.

PURPOSE: Stretch-induced force deficit suggests an acute stretch-specific strength capacity loss, which is commonly attributed to EMG reductions. Since those deficits could also be attributed to general fatigue induced by overloading the muscle, this study aimed to compare stretching with an exhausting calf raise programme to compare strength and stretching responses. METHOD: This study included 16 participants with different, high-duration calf muscle stretching effects (10, 20, 30 min of stretching) with resistance training (RT) (3 × 12 repetitions) performed until muscle failure, by using a cross-over study design with pre-post comparisons. Strength was tested via isometric plantar flexor diagnostics, while flexibility was assessed using the knee-to-wall test (KtW) and an isolated goniometer test. RESULTS: Using a three-way ANOVA, RT strength decreases were greater compared to 10 and 20 min of stretching (p = 0.01-0.02), but similar to those of 30 min of stretching. ROM in the KtW showed no specific stretch-induced increases, while only the stretching conditions enhanced isolated tested ROM (p < 0.001-0.008). No RT-related isolated ROM increases were observed. CONCLUSIONS: The results showed both interventions had similar effects on strength and ROM in the calf muscles. More holistic explanatory approaches such as fatigue and warm-up are discussed in the manuscript and call for further research.

Effects of Chronic Static Stretching on Maximal Strength and Muscle Hypertrophy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis with Meta-Regression.

BACKGROUND: Increases in maximal strength and muscle volume represent central aims of training interventions. Recent research suggested that the chronic application of stretch may be effective in inducing hypertrophy. The present systematic review therefore aimed to syntheisize the evidence on changes of strength and muscle volume following chronic static stretching. METHODS: Three data bases were sceened to conduct a systematic review with meta-analysis. Studies using randomized, controlled trials with longitudinal (≥ 2 weeks) design, investigating strength and muscle volume following static stretching in humans, were included. Study quality was rated by two examiners using the PEDro scale. RESULTS: A total of 42 studies with 1318 cumulative participants were identified. Meta-analyses using robust variance estimation showed small stretch-mediated maximal strength increases (d = 0.30 p < 0.001) with stretching duration and intervention time as significant moderators. Including all studies, stretching induced small magnitude, but significant hypertrophy effects (d = 0.20). Longer stretching durations and intervention periods as well as higher training frequencies revealed small (d = 0.26-0.28), but significant effects (p < 0.001-0.005), while lower dosage did not reach the level of significance (p = 0.13-0.39). CONCLUSIONS: While of minor effectiveness, chronic static stretching represents a possible alternative to resistance training when aiming to improve strength and increase muscle size. As a dose-response relationship may exist, higher stretch durations and frequencies as well as long program durations should be further elaborated.