Getting the most from your stretching routine

The conclusions of a systematic review of hundreds
of studies contradict the most common static stretching findings from the last
15 years. This research reviews hundreds of studies to determine best way to
stretch to improve range of motion, prevent injury during sports and
exercise.

The conclusions of a systematic review of hundreds of
studies contradict the most common static stretching findings from the last 15
years. This research is available in Applied Physiology, Nutrition, and
Metabolism and the findings have been endorsed by the Canadian Society for
Exercise Physiology (CSEP), Canada’s resource and voice for exercise physiology
and health & fitness.

For over 30 years, from the 1960s to the late 1990s,
fitness professionals, enthusiasts and athletes were told that static
stretching (stretching muscles while the body is at rest) was important for
increased flexibility, improved performance and injury reduction. This period
was followed by 15 years of being told that static stretching could cause
performance impairments and that it does not reduce injury risk, resulting in a
dramatic switch to dynamic stretching, where movements are performed through
large ranges of motion usually at a fast speed. As a result, many people no
longer perform static stretching before exercise or playing sports.

A comprehensive review of the literature published today
brings new recommendations to fitness enthusiasts, athletes, coaches and
rehabilitation practitioners. Upon reviewing hundreds of studies, researchers
found that static stretching, when incorporated into a full warm-up routine
that includes an initial aerobic component, static and dynamic stretching and
then active and dynamic sport-specific activities should not result in
significant performance impairments and may reduce muscle strain injury risk.
This systematic review has also highlighted the lack of scientific data regarding
the effects of dynamic stretching on injury risk.

“It is important for fitness professionals and
enthusiasts, coaches, rehabilitation professionals and other scientists to
critically assess the findings of fitness studies” says Dr. David Behm,
Memorial University of Newfoundland and lead author of the study. “Many
studies over the last 15 years did not include a full warm-up, something that
most athletes do regularly. Many studies also tested stretches that were held
much longer than what is typically done,” continued Dr. Behm. “Before
incorporating new findings into your fitness activities, think about how the
study applies to your situation and activities.”

“CSEP strongly supports promoting physical activity
for healthy outcomes and equally important to that are warm up routines that
increase range of motion and decrease muscle injury,” says Dr. Phil
Chilibeck, CSEP Chair. “The recommendation in the CSEP Position Stand is
that all components of a warmup be included with appropriate duration of stretching.
The inclusion of static, or Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation (PNF),
stretching is recommended and has the potential to positively influence the
standard warmup routines of a large number of athletes.”

David Behm, Anthony Blazevich, Anthony Kay and Malachy
McHugh.Systematic Review: Acute Effects of Muscle Stretching on Physical
Performance, Range of Motion and Injury Incidence in Healthy Active
Individuals. Applied Physiology, Nutrition, and Metabolism, December 2015
DOI: 10.1139/apnm-2015-0235

Normal
0

false
false
false

EN-US
X-NONE
X-NONE

/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:”Table Normal”;
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-parent:””;
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:”Calibri”,sans-serif;
mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;}