Refine
Has Fulltext
- no (2)
Year of publication
- 2021 (2) (remove)
Document Type
- Article (2)
Language
- English (2) (remove)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (2)
Keywords
- Crossover (2) (remove)
Institute
Background
Static stretching (SS) can impair performance and increase range of motion of a non-exercised or non-stretched muscle, respectively. An underdeveloped research area is the effect of unilateral stretching on non-local force output.
Objective
The objective of this review was to describe the effects of unilateral SS on contralateral, non-stretched, muscle force and identify gaps in the literature.
Methods
A systematic literature search following preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analyses Protocols guidelines was performed according to prescribed inclusion and exclusion criteria. Weighted means and ranges highlighted the non-local force output response to unilateral stretching. The physiotherapy evidence database scale was used to assess study risk of bias and methodological quality.
Results
Unilateral stretching protocols from six studies involved 6.3 +/- 2 repetitions of 36.3 +/- 7.4 s with 19.3 +/- 5.7 s recovery between stretches. The mean stretch-induced force deficits exhibited small magnitude effect sizes for both the stretched (-6.7 +/- 7.1%, d = -0.35: 0.01 to -1.8) and contralateral, non-stretched, muscles (-4.0 +/- 4.9%, d = , 0.22: 0.08 to 1.1). Control measures exhibited trivial deficits.
Conclusion
The limited literature examining non-local effects of prolonged SS revealed that both the stretched and contralateral, non-stretched, limbs of young adults demonstrate small magnitude force deficits. However, the frequency of studies with these effects were similar with three measures demonstrating deficits, and four measures showing trivial changes. These results highlight the possible global (non-local) effects of prolonged SS. Further research should investigate effects of lower intensity stretching, upper versus lower body stretching, different age groups, incorporate full warm-ups, and identify predominant mechanisms among others.
Background Recent studies indicate the existence of a repeated bout effect on the contralateral untrained limb following eccentric and isometric contractions. Aims This review aims to summarize the evidence for magnitude, duration and differences of this effect following isometric and eccentric preconditioning exercises. Methods Medline, Cochrane, and Web of science were searched from January 1971 until September 2020. Randomized controlled trials, case-control studies and cross-sectional studies were identified by combining keywords and synonyms (e.g., "contralateral", "exercise", "preconditioning", "protective effect"). At least two of the following outcome parameters were mandatory for study inclusion: strength, muscle soreness, muscle swelling, limb circumference, inflammatory blood markers or protective index (relative change of aforementioned measures). Results After identifying 1979 articles, 13 studies were included. Most investigations examined elbow flexors and utilized eccentric isokinetic protocols to induce the contralateral repeated bout effect. The magnitude of protection was observed in four studies, smaller values of the contralateral when compared to the ipsilateral repeated bout effect were noted in three studies. The potential mechanism is thought to be of neural central nature since no differences in peripheral muscle activity were observed. Time course was examined in three investigations. One study showed a smaller protective effect following isometric preconditioning when compared to eccentric preconditioning exercises. Conclusions The contralateral repeated bout effect demonstrates a smaller magnitude and lasts shorter than the ipsilateral repeated bout effect. Future research should incorporate long-term controlled trials including larger populations to identify central mechanisms. This knowledge should be used in clinical practice to prepare immobilized limbs prospectively for an incremental load.