Dynamic stretching is effective as static stretching at

Dynamic Stretching Is Effective As Static Stretching At-Free PDF

  • Date:17 Jan 2021
  • Views:5
  • Downloads:0
  • Pages:9
  • Size:508.50 KB

Share Pdf : Dynamic Stretching Is Effective As Static Stretching At

Download and Preview : Dynamic Stretching Is Effective As Static Stretching At


Report CopyRight/DMCA Form For : Dynamic Stretching Is Effective As Static Stretching At


Transcription:

Coons et al Dynamic static stretching JOURNAL OF HUMAN SPORT EXERCISE. INTRODUCTION, Flexibility is the capacity of a joint to move through its entire ROM ACSM 2010 While the topic of flexibility. and sports performance has been thoroughly debated Craib et al 1996 Gleim McHugh 1997 Hunter. Marshall 2002 Kokkonen Nelson Eldredge Winchester 2007 Nelson Kokkonen Arnall 2005 Shrier. 1999 an optimal ROM for fitness and sports performance has yet to be established Reasons for improving. flexibility in a sports context include decreasing injury Dodebo White George 2004 Safran Garrett. Seaber 1988 and increasing performance Stewart Sleivert 1998 Specifically it has been suggested. that the increased muscle tendon compliance associated with flexibility training may increase elasticity. Nelson Kokkonen 2007 and cause an increased force of contraction Shrier 1999. For decades static stretching has been the standard modality used in training programs as it has been. shown to be more or equally effective at increasing flexibility than other forms of stretching Vasdeki 2011. Covert and colleagues 2010 compared the effects of 4 weeks of static or ballistic stretching on hamstring. muscle ROM While this study found that both stretching groups significantly increased flexibility static. stretching also produced significantly more gains in ROM than ballistic stretching In addition Bandy and. colleagues 1998 reported that both dynamic ROM and static stretching significantly increased hamstring. flexibility and that static stretching was two times more effective at increasing hamstring flexibility than. dynamic ROM exercises, Traditionally static stretching is implemented during the pre exercise warm up as it is believed that pre. exercise stretching prevents injuries during physical training However the use of static stretching in pre. exercise warm ups has been questioned because several studies have demonstrated a negative association. between static stretching and performance Burkett Phillips Ziuraitis 2005 Fletcher Jones 2004. McNeal Sands 2003 Nelson et al 2005 Papadopoulos Siatras Kellis 2005 Siatras Papadopoulos. Mameletzi Gerodimos Kellis 2003 Wallmann Mercer McWhorter 2005 Since these studies. practitioners have started to use other forms of stretching in pre exercise warm up sessions In this regard. dynamic stretching has been a popular choice to replace static stretching because the acute effects have. been shown to improve performance parameters such as agility endurance strength power and anaerobic. capacity Dalrymple Davis Dwyer Moir 2010 A D Faigenbaum et al 2006 Herman Smith 2008. Jaggers Swank Frost Lee 2008, A central goal of including stretching in a flexibility program is to increase ROM While the effectiveness of. chronic static stretching on flexibility has been well established knowledge of the effects of chronic dynamic. stretching protocols on flexibility is lacking Therefore the purpose of this study was to compare the effects. of four weeks of dynamic stretching to an equivalent period of standard static stretching on hamstring. flexibility during a concurrent plyometric training program in high school volleyball players It was. hypothesized that the standard stretching group would produce more gains in ROM than the dynamic. stretching group,MATERIALS AND METHODS,Participants. Twenty five females from two local high school volleyball teams volunteered to take part in this study at the. beginning of preseason training All parents legal guardians and subjects were informed of the experimental. risks Before the investigation parents legal guardians of subjects under 18 years of age and subjects 18. years and older read and signed an informed consent form whereas subjects under 18 years of age read. 1154 2017 ISSUE 4 VOLUME 12 2017 University of Alicante. Coons et al Dynamic static stretching JOURNAL OF HUMAN SPORT EXERCISE. and signed an assent form The study was approved by an institutional review board for use on human. Upon gathering informed consent and assent participants were randomized into either a dynamic stretching. group n 12 or a standard stretching group n 13 A pre test post test randomized groups design was. used to examine the effects of dynamic and standard stretching programs on hamstring flexibility All study. participants were concurrently participating in the same plyometric training program Subjects were randomly. assigned to either standard or dynamic stretching groups within each volleyball team The hamstring. stretching programs were performed three days a week for four weeks Chan Hong Robinson 2001. Measures and Procedures, The subjects in this study were recruited from the same plyometric training program that was administered.
by the primary investigator All participants were simultaneously participating in a plyometric program that. emphasized movement at the ankle joint All subjects were required to participate in 80 of the flexibility. training program in order to be included in the study Prior to the study subjects completed a demographic. questionnaire created by the primary investigator and supplied information on injury status age and playing. history Height was measured with a Model 222 SECA Stadiometer and weight was measured using a Model. 770 SECA Scale SECA Hanover MD,Flexibility measures. Pre test flexibility of the hamstrings was assessed within three days prior to beginning the flexibility program. and post test flexibility was assessed within three days of completing the flexibility program Flexibility. measures obtained using a Biodex System 3 Biodex Medical Systems Shirley NY dynamometer and were. confirmed by a goniometer Prior to measuring flexibility participants performed a 5 minute warm up on a. cycle ergometer at 50 rpm and 0 5kp resistance Hamstrings flexibility was measured in a supine position. and the pelvis was constrained by straps to prevent movement from joints other than the hip A knee. immobilizer was also used to prevent knee flexion and ensure that ROM measures emanated from the hip. during the flexibility tests Before flexibility measures were recorded subjects practiced the ROM testing. procedure three times during which participants were instructed to move the hip until they felt a stretch. sensation Prior to all flexibility measures the isokinetic dynamometer was zeroed after the participant s hip. was placed in a neutral position During testing each subject was asked to raise the limb as far as she could. actively move it and then hold the limb for five seconds at the end ROM at which time the number of degrees. of hip flexion from neutral was recorded Participants performed three flexibility trials and the greatest amount. of hip flexibility registered was used for analysis. Stretch training, The standard and dynamic stretching programs were identical in amount of time 30 seconds at stretch. Participants were instructed on proper procedures for each stretching protocol and practiced the stretches. prior to implementing the flexibility program Both stretching programs were overseen by the principal. investigator During the standard stretch protocol players performed two repetitions of slow static active. modified hurdler stretches with each stretch held for 30 seconds at the point of maximal stretch with mild. discomfort Yamaguchi Ishii 2005 The stretch was performed on the left leg and then on the right leg. after a 20 second rest period Yamaguchi Ishii 2005. For the dynamic stretching program participants completed four sets of dynamic stretches on each leg by. standing in an upright position Figure 1a and contracting the hip flexors with the knee extended so that the. leg was swung up to the anterior aspect of the body Figure 1b This procedure was performed once every. VOLUME 12 ISSUE 4 2017 1155, Coons et al Dynamic static stretching JOURNAL OF HUMAN SPORT EXERCISE. two seconds A metronome was used to pace the stretching routines Stretching was performed five times at. a slow rate followed by 10 quick stretches performed as powerfully as possible without bouncing Yamaguchi. Ishii 2005 Stretching was first carried out on the left leg and after a 20 second rest period performed on. the right leg Yamaguchi Ishii 2005, Figure 1 Beggining a and ending b positions for harmstring dynamic stretching exercises See text for. more information, SPSS for Windows software was used for all statistical analyses Due to small group differences in pre test.
ROM scores data was initially analysed using analysis of covariance ANCOVA with the pre test scores as. the covariate A 2 group standard vs dynamic x 2 time before and after 4 weeks of training analysis of. variance ANOVA with repeated measures was used to evaluate differences in ROM between stretching. protocols standard and dynamic The alpha level was set at P 05. All subjects participated in 100 of the flexibility training sessions Overall and group characteristics are. provided in Table 1 Initial ANCOVA tests revealed no violations of the assumptions of normality linearity. homogeneity of variances and reliability of the covariate After adjusting for pre intervention range of motion. scores there was no significant difference between static and dynamic groups on post intervention ROM. scores P 31 2 03, 1156 2017 ISSUE 4 VOLUME 12 2017 University of Alicante. Coons et al Dynamic static stretching JOURNAL OF HUMAN SPORT EXERCISE. Table 1 Subject characteristics, A 2 way ANOVA for repeated measures was used to test the effect of dynamic and standard stretching on. hamstring ROM Pre test and post test ROM scores are presented in Table 2 There was a significant main. effect for dynamic and standard stretching P 001 2 367 indicating a significant increase in ROM in. both groups after the interventions However no statistical interaction was observed between stretching. groups and time P 84 2 001 indicating that there was no significant difference relative to. improvements in ROM between groups, Table 2 Pretest and posttest range of motion scores for the dynamic n 12 and standard n 13 groups. VOLUME 12 ISSUE 4 2017 1157, Coons et al Dynamic static stretching JOURNAL OF HUMAN SPORT EXERCISE. DISCUSSION, This study compared the effects of a 4 week dynamic stretching program to a 4 week standard stretching.
program on hamstring flexibility in female high school volleyball players The main findings of this study. showed that both dynamic and standard programs increased hamstring flexibility but neither group displayed. a greater advantage in eliciting flexibility gains. Effects of Dynamic and Standard Stretching on Flexibility. Several studies have shown that static stretching is effective at increasing ROM Bandy et al 1998 Covert. Alexander Petronis Davis 2010 Davis et al 2005 LaRoche Connolly 2006 Mahieu et al 2007. However there is a lack of research investigating the effects of chronic dynamic stretching on flexibility Our. study found no significant difference in hamstring ROM gains between a dynamic stretching program and a. standard stretching program Bandy et al 1998 compared six weeks of static stretching and dynamic ROM. exercises and found significantly greater gains in the static stretching group when compared to the dynamic. ROM group A contributing factor in the divergent findings may include the differing dynamic protocols. between the two studies The training protocol used by Bandy et al 1998 included a 5 second delay at the. end of the range of motion We found this interesting insofar as dynamic stretching is cyclic and does not. include 5 second pauses Jaggers et al 2008 While the dynamic training protocol used by Bandy et al. 1998 was similar to our study in that they attempted to use equal time at stretch between dynamic and. static protocols their stretching protocol appears to combine static and dynamic concepts rather than being. distinctly dynamic in nature Because cyclic without pauses stretching may use different mechanisms to. increase range of motion Mahieu et al 2007 it is regrettable that a definitively dynamic stretching protocol. was not used, Results of studies comparing cyclic stretching ballistic and dynamic to static standard stretching have. varied For example Covert et al Covert et al 2010 found that increases in hamstring flexibility were. significantly higher with four weeks of static stretching 11 9 when compared to 4 weeks ballistic stretching. 3 8 In contrast LaRoche and Connolly 2006 found that four weeks of static stretching 8 6 did not. significantly differ from 4 weeks of ballistic stretching 9 7 Also Bandy et al 1998 demonstrated that. increases in hamstring ROM were significantly higher with chronic static stretching 11 4 when compared. to dynamic ROM exercises 4 3 In comparison the current study found no significant difference between. the gains in dynamic stretching 5 9 and the gains of standard stretching 6 6 A commonality between. the studies that demonstrated significantly greater gains in static stretching groups vs cyclic stretching. groups used populations with tight hamstrings Furthermore the pre test ROM values from LaRoche and. Connolly ballistic group 95 1 static group 96 8 and current study dynamic group 94 2 standard group. 98 1 were similar This may mean that static stretching is more effective at increasing flexibility in persons. with limited or decreased flexibility,Mechanisms for Increasing Flexibility. Our study found that both static and dynamic stretching groups significantly increased ROM with no difference. between the gains of the stretching methods While the gains in ROM appear to be similar the mechanisms. Dynamic stretching is effective as static stretching at increasing flexibility JOHN M COONS1 COLLEEN E GOULD1 JWA K KIM2 RICHARD S FARLEY1 JENNIFER L CAPUTO1 1Exercise Science Health and Human Performance Middle Tennessee State University United States 2Psychology Middle Tennessee State University United States ABSTRACT

Related Books