|
FLEXIBILITY IS NOT RELATED TO STRETCH-INDUCED DEFICITS IN FORCE
OR POWER
|
School of Human Kinetics and Recreation, Memorial University of Newfoundland,
St. John's, Newfoundland, Canada
| Received |
|
08 July 2005 |
| Accepted |
|
05
December 2005 |
| Published |
|
01
March 2006 |
©
Journal of Sports Science and Medicine (2006) 5, 33
- 42
Search
Google Scholar for Citing Articles
| ABSTRACT |
| Previous
studies have demonstrated that an acute bout of static stretching
may cause significant performance impairments. However, there are
no studies investigating the effect of prolonged stretch training
on stretch-induced decrements. It was hypothesized that individuals
exhibiting a greater range of motion (ROM) in the correlation study
or those who attained a greater ROM with flexibility training would
experience less stretch-induced deficits. A correlation study had
18 participants (25 ± 8.3 years, 1.68 ± 0.93 m, 73.5 ± 14.4 kg) stretch
their quadriceps, hamstrings and plantar flexors three times each
for 30 s with 30 s recovery. Subjects were tested pre- and post-stretch
for ROM, knee extension maximum voluntary isometric contraction (MVIC)
force and drop jump measures. A separate training study with 12 subjects
(21.9 ± 2.1 years, 1.77 ± 0.11 m 79.8 ± 12.4 kg) involved a four-week,
five-days per week, flexibility training programme that involved stretching
of the quadriceps, hamstrings and plantar flexors. Pre- and post-training
testing included ROM as well as knee extension and flexion MVIC, drop
and countermovement jump measures conducted before and after an acute
bout of stretching. An acute bout of stretching incurred significant
impairments for knee extension (-6.1% to -8.2%; p < 0.05) and flexion
(-6.6% to -10.7%; p < 0.05) MVIC, drop jump contact time (5.4%
to 7.4%; p < 0.01) and countermovement jump height (-5.5% to -5.7%;
p < 0.01). The correlation study showed no significant relationship
between ROM and stretch-induced deficits. There was also no significant
effect of flexibility training on the stretch-induced decrements.
It is probable that because the stretches were held to the point of
discomfort with all testing, the relative stress on the muscle was
similar resulting in similar impairments irrespective of the ROM or
tolerance to stretching of the muscle.
KEY
WORDS: Flexibility, force, jumps, static stretching.
|
| INTRODUCTION |
|
There
have been a number of articles in the recent literature reporting
on decreases in isometric force (Behm et al., 2001;
Fowles et al., 2000;
Kokkonen et al., 1998;
Power et al., 2004),
one repetition maximum strength (Nelson and Kokkonen, 2001),
jump height (Young and Behm, 2003)
and muscle activation (Avela et al., 1999;
Behm et al., 2001;
Fowles et al., 2000;
Guissard et al., 1988;
2001;
Power et al., 2004)
following an acute bout of static stretching. Acute bouts of static
stretching to the point of discomfort have also been shown to impair
balance, reaction and movement time (Behm et al., 2004).
These stretch-induced impairments have been reported to occur as
early as 1 min post-stretching (Behm
et al., 2004)
continuing for 120 min post-stretching (Power et al., 2004).
Explanations for the stretch-induced deficits include increases
in muscle compliance that could result in a longer rate of force
development (Behm et al., 2001;
Fowles et al., 2000).
Others have suggested that afferent inhibition, due to the tensile
stresses exerted, by placing the muscle under stretch to the point
of discomfort for extended periods of time (i.e. 30-60 s), would
contribute to the performance decrements (Behm et al., 2001;
Fowles et al., 2000;
Guissard et al., 1988;
2001).
Both explanations suggest that the muscle has been placed under
unfamiliar stress that may have led to changes in the muscle and
subsequently impacting the excitability of the motor neuron pool.
A decrease in muscle stiffness has been reported following stretch
training (Guissard and Duchateau, 2004).
In contrast, Magnusson et al. (1996b)
reported no significant differences in stiffness, energy or peak
torque around the knee joint after three weeks of stretch training.
These authors suggested that the increased range of motion (ROM)
achieved with training could be a consequence of an increased stretch
tolerance. It may be possible that the stretch-induced impairments
reported in the literature are a training-specific phenomenon. A
more flexible (greater ROM) musculotendinous unit (MTU) or a MTU
that is more tolerant of stretch tension might accommodate the stresses
associated with an acute bout of stretching more successfully than
a stiff MTU. There have been no studies to our knowledge that have
examined the relationship between the extent of ROM around a joint
(flexibility) and the extent of stretch-induced impairments. Perhaps
if an individual possessed a high level of flexibility or tolerance
to stretch, then they may be able to better sustain the stress of
an acute bout of stretching.
The objective of the study was twofold; to determine a) the relationship
between an individual's joint ROM (flexibility) and acute stretching-induced
changes and b) whether a four-week flexibility-training programme
would reduce stretch-induced impairments.
|
| METHODS |
|
Experimental
design
In order to test the hypotheses, two separate experiments were conducted.
A cross-sectional correlation study tested 18 subjects for ROM associated
with hip flexion, hip extension and plantar flexion-dorsiflexion.
Subjects were tested before and following an acute bout of static
stretching of the lower limbs for knee extension maximum voluntary
isometric contraction (MVIC) force and drop jump performance. A
correlation matrix was used to analyze the relationship between
the extent of ROM at the various joints and the changes in isometric
force and dynamic jump tests before and after the acute bout of
stretching (Figure 1).
The second experiment was a longitudinal repeated measures design
that had subjects tested for knee extension and flexion MVIC and
drop jump performance as well as countermovement vertical jump performance
before and following an acute bout of stretching. Twelve subjects
participated in a five-day per week, four-week duration, flexibility
training programme for the lower limbs. Following the training programme,
subjects were again tested before and following an acute bout of
stretching. Differences in knee extension and flexion MVIC, drop
and countermovement jump performance before and following the acute
bout of stretching were compared pre- and post-training to determine
if training had diminished stretch-induced impairments (Figure
1).
Participants
A convenience group (9 men and 9 women) (mean ± SD: age; 25 ± 8.3
years, height; 1.68 ± 0.93 m, body mass; 73.5 ± 14.4 kg) participated
in the correlation study. Similarly, a second group (12 men) (age;
21.9 ± 2.1 years, height; 1.77 ± 0.11 m, body mass; 79.8 ± 12.4
kg) who were not actively engaged in flexibility training volunteered
to partake in the training study. All participants were from the
University student population and completed a Physical Activity
Readiness Questionnaire (PAR-Q) form (Canadian Society for Exercise
Physiology, 2003b)
indicating no significant health problems. Each subject was required
to read and sign a consent form prior to participating in the study.
The University Human Investigations Committee approved both studies.
Dependent
variables
All correlation and training study participants warmed up on a cycle
ergometer (Monark Ergomedic 828E) for five minutes at a minimum
intensity of 70 Watts.
Correlation
and training study active flexibility measures: All correlation
study participants completed three trials of three active flexibility
tests: sit and reach, plantar flexion-dorsiflexion and hip extension
tests. Training study participants were tested using three trials
of the sit and reach, hip extension and hip flexion tests. The plantar
flexion-dorsiflexion test was replaced with the hip flexion test
in the training study since the former test had a substantially
smaller absolute range of motion making precision measurements more
difficult. Since the sit and reach test involves both lower back
and hamstring muscles, the hip flexion test which primarily targets
the hamstrings was substituted in the training study. All participants
were re-tested within 2-3 days of the pre-test to determine the
reliability of the tests.
Using a sit and reach testing device (Acuflex I, Novel Products
Inc., USA), participants sat on a mat with legs fully extended,
and reached forward toward their feet. They held this position for
two seconds while the distance was measured in cm (Canadian Society
for Exercise Physiology, 2003a;
Heyward, 2005).
In the plantar flexion-dorsiflexion test, a goniometer was used
to measure the ROM. One lever of the goniometer was land marked
over the lateral midline of the fibula using the head of the fibula
as a reference while the pivot was placed on the lateral aspect
of the lateral malleolus. The other lever was positioned on the
lateral aspect of the fifth metatarsal bone and its position was
used to determine the degrees of movement (Heyward, 2005).
Participants attempted to flex and extend their ankles through the
greatest ROM possible. When performing the hip extension test, the
subject lay prone on the floor and lifted their right leg toward
the ceiling without assistance from the researcher. The researcher
ensured that their hip (anterior superior iliac spine) maintained
contact with the floor and their leg remained straight (knee extended)
through out this test. The height of the patella was measured from
the floor in cm (Canadian Society for Exercise Physiology, 2003a).
With the hip flexion test, participants assumed a supine position
and flexed their hip with extended knee as far as possible without
assistance from the researcher. A goniometer was used to measure
ROM. One lever of the goniometer was land marked on the lateral
midline of the pelvis while the pivot was placed on the lateral
aspect of the hip joint using the greater trochanter of the femur
as a reference. The other lever was positioned on the lateral midline
of the femur using the lateral epicondyle as the reference to determine
the degrees of movement (Heyward, 2005).
Knee
extension and flexion MVIC: Subjects in the correlation study
performed three knee extension MVICs and three-drop jumps. In addition
to the MVICs and drop jumps, training study participants also were
tested with three countermovement vertical jumps and knee flexion
MVIC. The series of MVICs and jumps were randomized. A minimum two-minute
rest period was provided between each MVIC. For the knee extension
MVIC, participants sat on a padded bench with hips and knees flexed
at 90o, their upper leg and hips restrained by two straps.
The ankle was inserted into a padded strap at the level of the malleoli,
attached by a high-tension wire to a Wheatstone bridge configuration
strain gauge (Omega Engineering Inc. LCCA 250). Knee flexion MVIC
involved the same set-up except the knee was flexed at 120o.
An angle of 120o rather than 90o (for knee
extension) was used since it placed the hamstrings in a slightly
lengthened position which provided greater hamstrings force output.
Forces were recorded from the MVIC with the greatest force output.
Forces were detected by the strain gauge, amplified (BioPac Systems
Inc. DA 100 and analog to digital converter MP100WSW) and monitored
on computer (Sona Phoenix PC). All data were collected on a computer
at a sampling rate of 2000 Hz and stored. Data were recorded and
analyzed with a commercially designed software programme (AcqKnowledge
III, BioPac Systems Inc.).
Drop
jumps: The three-drop jumps were interspersed by a minimum one-minute
rest period. Drop jumps from a height of 30 cm were performed with
the subjects emphasizing the shortest possible contact time and
the greatest jump height (Young et al., 1995;
2001).
With hands remaining on their hips, participants landed on a contact
mat (Kinematic Measurement Systems, Skye SA Australia) imbedded
with a timer switch, which was used by the acquisition software
(Innervations, Muncie, Indiana) to calculate contact time and jump
height. Within individuals, a particular jump may have had the shortest
contact time while another jump may have achieved the greatest jump
height. Since contact time can affect jump height, the mean of the
two-drop jumps with the greatest height were used to analyze jump
height and contact time.
Countermovement
jumps: While standing on the contact mat participants were asked
to perform three countermovement jumps. One-minute rest periods
were allocated between each jump. Although, swinging of the arms
was permitted and the speed and knee angle depth of the countermovement
was self-selected, reliability measures were very high (ICC: 0.95).
Since the duration of force application was not important in this
test and thus the effect of one variable on the other (contact time
affecting jump height) was not of primary importance, the greatest
jump height of the three trials was used for analysis.
Independent
variables
Correlation and training study intervention
Acute stretching protocol: The order of quadriceps, hamstrings
and plantar flexors stretching were randomized. Based on previous
research that has recommended 30 s or greater duration of stretching
(Bandy et al., 1997;
Bandy and Irion, 1994),
stretches were held to the threshold of discomfort for a duration
of 30 s with 30 s recovery periods between stretches. Each type
of stretch was repeated three times. Stretching of both legs included
a series of unilateral kneeling knee flexion (quadriceps), supine
hip flexion with extended knee (hamstrings), extended leg (knee)
dorsiflexion while standing (stretch of the plantar flexors with
gastrocnemius emphasis), and flexed knee dorsiflexion while standing
(stretch of the plantar flexors with soleus emphasis) (Alter, 1996).
Stretching was passive for the quadriceps and hamstrings with the
same investigator controlling the change in the ROM and resistance
for all subjects. The researcher would extend the limb to the limits
of the participant's ROM without incurring injury. In response to
feedback from the participants during the individual stretches,
the investigator would modify the tension on the muscle to maintain
the same level of discomfort. Subjects provided their own resistance
for the plantar flexors stretches with the instructions to continue
to stretch the muscles to the point of discomfort.
Five minutes following the acute bout of stretching, MVIC and jump
testing was conducted in the same manner described above. A 5-minute
recovery period was utilized to simulate a sport situation where
an individual would not commence their activity or competition immediately
after completing their static stretching. Since the duration of
the testing was approximately 20 minutes and the tests were randomized,
the results would be applicable to any of the activities tested
for a period of approximately 25 minutes following the stretching
and aerobic warm-up.
Longitudinal
study flexibility training programme: Following the pre-training
stretching and testing, training subjects participated in a four-week
flexibility-training programme. The programme consisted of four
stretches repeated five days a week for four weeks. Stretches were
the same as the acute bout of stretching, which included a kneeling
knee flexion (quadriceps), supine hip flexion with extended knee
(hamstrings), and extended and flexed knee dorsiflexion (plantar
flexors) (Alter, 1996).
Similar to the acute bout of stretching, each participant was assisted
with their quadriceps and hamstring stretching by the investigator,
who subjectively controlled the ROM and tension and observed the
plantar flexor stretches to ensure that maximal stretch (to the
point of discomfort) was being reached. The participant continually
informed the investigator of any perceived changes in tension during
the 30 s stretch. If stretch tension was not at the point of discomfort
then the investigator or participant (for the plantar flexors stretches)
increased the ROM until initial discomfort was attained again. At
the end of four week flexibility training, subjects were required
to perform the testing procedures previously described.
Statistical
analysis:
Correlation data were analyzed using a Pearson product moment correlation
matrix (SPSS statistical software; Version 11.5) to determine the
relationship between the dependent (MVIC and drop jump tests) and
independent (stretches) variables. A one way repeated measures analysis
of variance (ANOVA) was performed to determine if significant differences
existed between pre- and post-stretch data (GB Stat Dynamic Microsystems,
Silver Spring Maryland USA) in the correlation study.
Whereas, the test measures involving the 12 subjects in the longitudinal
training study exhibited a normal distribution (Critical value =
0.84 for p < 0.05; values ranged from countermovement jump =
0.86 to leg extension MVC = 0.91) a two way repeated measures ANOVA
(2x2) could be used. Main effects or levels included 1) pre- and
post-acute bouts of stretching and 2) pre- and post-stretch training.
An alpha level of p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
Effect sizes (ES) were also calculated and reported (Cohen, 1988).
Reliability of the measures was assessed using an alpha (Cronbach)
model intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) with all subjects.
|
| RESULTS |
|
Correlation
study
Flexibility: Although significant correlations existed between plantar
flexion- dorsiflexion ROM, hip extension ROM and sit and reach flexibility
(Table 1), no significant relationships were seen between initial
ROM and stretch-induced performance changes overall or within genders.
Isometric
force output: A -6. 5% deficit (p < 0.01; ES = 0.16) was
observed between pre- and post-stretch knee extension MVIC force
output (615 ± 248 N vs. 575 ± 212 N respectively).
Drop
jump: Contact time increased by 5.4% (p < 0.01; ES = 0.47)
(pre-stretch: 220 ± 26 ms, post-stretch: 233 ± 20.0 ms) between
pre- and post-stretch measures. There were no significant changes
in drop jump height.
Longitudinal training study
Training-induced changes in ROM: There were increases in sit and
reach (11.8%) (p < 0.01; ES = 0.59), hip extension (19.7%) (p
< 0.01; ES = 1.87) and hip flexion (13.4%) (p < 0.01; ES =
1.47) measures following the four weeks of flexibility training
(Table 2).
Stretch-
induced deficits: Prior to the flexibility training programme,
the acute bout of stretching elicited significant impairments of
-8.2% in knee extension MVIC force (Figure 2; p < 0.05; ES = 0.6), -6.6% in knee flexion MVIC
force (Figure 3; p < 0.05; ES = 0.39), 7.4% (pre-stretch:
198 ± 27 ms, post-stretch: 184 ± 27 ms), in drop jump contact time
(p < 0.05; ES = 0.54) and -5.7% (pre- stretch: 34.6 ± 6.6 cm,
post-stretch: 32.6 ± 7.1cm) in countermovement jump height (p <
0.01; ES = 0.3). There were no significant (p = 0.6) changes in
drop jump height (pre-stretch: 25 ± 8 cm, post-stretch: 27 ± 8 cm).
Following the flexibility training programme, the acute bout of
stretching produced significant impairments of -6.1% for knee extension
MVIC force (Figure 2; p < 0.02; ES = 0.63), -10.7% for
knee flexion MVIC force (Figure
3; p < 0.01; ES = 0.57) and -5.5% (pre- stretch: 35.9 ± 7.1
cm, post-stretch: 33.9 ± 5.8 cm) for countermovement jump height
(p < 0.01; ES = 0.34). There was a non-significant increase of
2.6% (pre-stretch: 198 ± 27 ms,
post-stretch: 202 ± 31 ms) for drop jump contact time, with no appreciable
change in drop jump height (pre-stretch: 25 ± 8 cm, post-stretch:
25 ± 7 cm).
Effect
of Flexibility Training: A comparison of the pre- to post-stretch-induced
changes before and following the flexibility-training programme
revealed no significant effect for training.
Reliability
Reliability measures using ICC for MVIC force, drop jump contact
time, drop jump height and countermovement height indicated correlations
of 0.75, 0.90, 0.98 and 0.95 respectively. Flexibility reliability
measures for the sit and reach test, hip flexion, hip extension
and plantar flexion - dorsiflexion tests were 0.92, 0.96, 0.84 and
0.90 respectively.
|
| DISCUSSION |
|
The
most significant findings in this study were that an individual's
initial level of joint ROM was not correlated with stretch-induced
deficits and secondly, that four weeks of flexibility training did
not diminish stretch-induced impairments. While there have been
many studies demonstrating decreases in isometric force (Behm et
al., 2001;
Fowles et al., 2000;
Kokkonen et al., 1998;
Power et al., 2004),
dynamic strength (Nelson and Kokkonen, 2001),
and jump height (Young and Behm, 2003)
following an acute bout of static stretching, there have been no
studies reporting on the effect of greater joint ROM or flexibility
training on stretch-induced impairments. Klinge et al., 1997
reported that the addition of flexibility exercises to a 13-week
strength-training programme had no significant effect on the strength
training responses. Wilson et al., 1992
found that the rebound bench press of powerlifters was enhanced
following eight weeks of flexibility training due to an increased
utilization of elastic strain energy during the lift. While Hunter
and Marshall, 2002
demonstrated increases in countermovement jumps with 10 weeks of
flexibility training, Guissard and Duchateau (1988)
showed no change in MVIC torque or rate of torque development following
30 sessions of static stretching. However, none of the aforementioned
studies involved an acute bout of stretching immediately prior to
the post-training measures.
It could be hypothesized that the repeated bouts of stretching associated
with a flexibility-training programme would reduce impairments associated
with a subsequent acute bout of static stretching. A more flexible
musculotendinous unit (MTU) or a MTU that is more tolerant of stretch
tension might accommodate the stresses associated with an acute
bout of stretching more successfully than a stiff MTU. This was
not the case in the present study. Since the stretching instructions
were to stretch to the point of discomfort for both pre- and post-training,
the intensity of stretching was relative to the stretch tolerance
of the MTU. Whether an individual's ROM was greater prior to training
(correlation study) or became greater with training, the more flexible
MTU would have been elongated to a greater extent during the acute
bout of stretching than a less flexible MTU. Thus, irrespective
of the bsolute
change in ROM, it seems that the relative stretch-induced stress
placed on the MTU leads to similar impairments. Although it was
not incorporated in the present study, it is conceivable that if
the absolute change in ROM used in the pre-training stretch intervention
was matched post-training, the relatively less stress (smaller ROM)
placed on the more flexible MTU would have resulted in less impairment.
The decrements associated with the acute bouts of stretching both
before and after the flexibility training programme reflect similar
stretch-induced decreases in force (Behm et al., 2001;
Fowles et al., 2000;
Fowles and Sale, 1997),
and power (Young and Behm, 2003)
reported in other published studies. An acute bout of stretching
has been reported to alter the length and stiffness of the affected
limb MTU. Although the exact mechanisms responsible for increases
in ROM following stretching are debatable, the increase has been
attributed to decreased MTU stiffness (Wilson et al., 1991;
1992)
as well as increased tolerance to stretch (Magnusson et al., 1996b).
Studies have reported both decreases (Magnusson et al., 1996a;
Toft et al., 1989)
and no change (Magnusson et al., 2000)
in MTU passive resistance or stiffness with an acute bout of stretching.
Changes in MTU stiffness might be expected to impact the transmission
of forces, the rate of force transmission and the rate at which
changes in muscle length or tension are detected. A slacker parallel
and series elastic component could increase the electromechanical
delay by slowing the period between myofilament crossbridge kinetics
and the exertion of tension by the MTU on the skeletal system. A
lengthened muscle due to an acute bout of stretching could have
a less than optimal cross-bridge overlap which, according to the
length tension relationship (Rassier et al., 1999),
could diminish muscle force output. The elongation of tendinous
tissues can also have an effect on force output (Kawakami et al.,
2002).
Another possibility is that stretch-induced stress could have a
detrimental effect of on neuromuscular activation (Avela et al.,
1999;
Behm et al., 2001,
Power et al., 2004).
Avela et al., 1999
investigated the effects of passive stretching of the triceps surae
muscle on reflex sensitivity. Following one hour of stretching there
were significant decreases in MVC (23.2%), EMG (19.9%), stretch
reflex peak-to-peak amplitude (84.8%), and the ratio of H-reflex
to muscle compound action potential (M-wave) (43.8%). Although neural
propagation seemed unaffected (M-wave), afferent excitation of the
motoneuron pool (H-reflex) was impaired. Although, Guissard et al.,
2001
reported decreases in H-reflex excitability during passive stretching,
the decrement was limited to the duration of stretching. Avela et
al., 1999
suggested that the decrease in the excitation of the motoneuron
pool resulted from a reduction in excitatory drive from the Ia afferents
onto the -motoneurons, possibly due to decreased resting discharge
of the muscle spindles via increased compliance of the MTU. Nonetheless,
whether stretch- induced impairments arise from changes in muscle
compliance solely or in concert with the afferent inhibition of
the motoneuron, an increased ROM in the present study did not ameliorate
the stretch- induced deficits.
There were significant increases in active ROM associated with the
flexibility-training programme (sit and reach: 11.8%, p < 0.01;
hip extension: 19.7%, p < 0. 01 and hip flexion: 13.4%; p <
0.01). While the present study incorporated 20 sessions of stretching,
others have reported statistically significant increases in ROM
with only 12 stretches over a 4-week period (Davis et al., 2005).
Since active stretches are limited by the strength of the opposing
muscle groups, the increases in ROM may not be identical to passive
flexibility measurements. However considering that activities of
daily living almost never involve passive ROM, the active flexibility
measures should better reflect daily realities.
Not all power measures demonstrated stretch-induced decrements.
While the countermovement jump height was diminished by an acute
bout of stretching, drop jump height was not significantly affected.
Both types of jumps were included in the flexibility training study
since the 30 cm drop jumps emphasized a short contact time (typically
under 200 ms) whereas the countermovement jump typically had a greater
duration (could not be directly measured in the present study) of
the stretch-shortening cycle. It was felt that the short contact
time drop jumps would mimic actions such as sprinting whereas the
countermovement jump would be more typical of power movements such
as shot put, basketball jumps, skating and other activities involving
force exerted over a longer duration. Deficits with countermovement
jumps demonstrated that static stretching held to the point of discomfort
would adversely affect the aforementioned type activities. A lack
of change in drop jump height could be attributed to the significant
stretch- induced increase in drop jump contact time (pre-training:
5.4% and post-training: 7.4%). Increases in drop jump contact time
post- acute stretching would allow for a greater impulse (force
x time) to be exerted possibly permitting stretch-induced diminished
forces (as exemplified by the decreased MVIC and countermovement
jump) to be exerted over a longer duration.
The modest number of participants and the use of only men might
hamper the implications and applications of the longitudinal study.
Nonetheless, the participation of men only should not significantly
affect the external validity of the findings, as the stretch-induced
deficits in force with the cross- sectional study (men and women)
were very similar to the training study (men) and other comparable
studies (Behm et al., 2001;
2004;
Fowles et al., 2000;
Power et al., 2004).
Furthermore, since the data was normally distributed and most effect
sizes were moderate, an argument can be made for the assumption
of external validity.
|
| CONCLUSIONS |
| An acute
bout of stretching to the point of discomfort resulted in impairments
in MVIC force, countermovement jump height, and drop jump contact
time. There were no significant correlations between the ROM around
a joint and the extent of stretch-induced force and power deficits.
Furthermore, four weeks of flexibility training did not influence
the magnitude of stretch-induced impairments. Thus, if individuals
hold stretches to the point of personal discomfort, the relative stress
will be similar with flexible or inflexible muscles. Further studies
should also examine the effectiveness of varying intensities of stretch
on changes in ROM. |
| KEY
POINTS |
- A
correlation and training study were used to examine the effects
of increased range of motion on stretch-induced changes in force
and jump measures
- An
acute bout of stretching incurred significant impairments for
knee extension and flexion MVIC, drop jump contact time and countermovement
jump height.
- Neither
study showed any significant relationship between ROM and stretch-induced
deficits.
|
| AUTHORS
BIOGRAPHY |
David BEHM
Employment: Prof. in the School of Human Kinetics and Recreation
at the Memorial University of Newfoundland, Canada
Degree: PhD.
Research interests: Exercise physiology and fitness.
E-mail: dbehm@mun.ca |
|
Erin E. BRADBURY
Erin is in the process of completing her Masters of Science
degree (Kinesiology) at Memorial University of Newfoundland. |
|
Allison T. HAYNES
After completing her Bachelor of Kinesiology degree at Memorial
University of Newfoundland, Allison is presently working on
her medical degree.
|
|
Joanne N. HODDER
Joanne is in the process of completing her Masters of Science
degree specializing in Kinesiology at Memorial University of
Newfoundland.
|
|
Allison M. LEONARD
After completing her Bachelor of Kinesiology degree at Memorial
University of Newfoundland, Allison pursued a Masters degree
in the Faculty of Medicine and is presently a medical student
at Memorial University.
|
|
Natasha R. PADDOCK
Natasha completed her Bachelor of Kinesiology degree at Memorial
University of Newfoundland and is presently a student in the
Masters of Science (Kinesiology) program.
|
|
|
|
|