•  
  •  
 

EFFECTS ON DYNAMIC AND STATIC STRETCHING AND SELF-MYOFASCIAL RELEASE ON MUSCLE POWER AND FLEXIBILITY

Abstract

Recent findings show that static stretching (SS) negatively impacts muscle power performance (MPP), while self-myofascial release (SMR) and dynamic stretching (DS) benefit ROM, flexibility and relieve post-exercise fatigue. Despite these findings, few studies have compared the effects of all 3 modalities on MPP and flexibility in the same study. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare the acute effects of DS, SS and SMR on MPP and flexibility. METHODS: Sixteen low-risk participants including 9 males and 7 females aged 18-48y (mean age 28 ± 9y) participated in this study. Participants were not excluded for physical fitness level but must have been free from musculoskeletal injury. A five-minute warm up preceeded each of three testing days, followed by either a DS, SS, or SMR stretching routine. All exercises targeted the lower extremities and each modality lasted about 15 min. DS was comprised of 11 stretches performed twice and SS consisted of 7 stretches repeated twice, with each held for 30 seconds. SMR with a foam roller consisted of 5 stretches performed twice for 90 seconds. Immediately following the stretch intervention for that day, participants were tested on flexibility using sit and reach and MPP using a 20-meter sprint with electronic timing gates, and vertical jump height with an electronic timing mat. Dependent variables were analyzed using ANOVA with repeated measures to assess differences in flexibility and MPP between stretching conditions at p<0.05. RESULTS: The findings in this study show a significant difference in flexibility following SMR (17.9 ± 2.4 in), as compared to SS (17.0 ± 2.8 in), and DS (16.9 ± 2.9 in) (p<0.05). There was no significant difference in 20-m sprint time between stretching modalities (3.3 ± 0.3 s, 3.4 ± 0.4 s, and 3.4 ± 0.3 s) for SMR, SS, and DS, respectively (p>0.05). Vertical jump height was also not statistically significant using repeated measures, although the univariate comparison between DS (18.9 ± 4.5 in) and both SMR (18.0 ± 4.0 in) and SS (18.1 ± 4.3 in), was significantly different (p<0.05). CONCLUSION: These results show that SMR produces better flexibility than either DS or SS and that DS produces better vertical jump performance than eith SMR or SS. These findings concur with previous. Future research should seek a larger cohort and attempt to recruit participants with similar fitness levels. Future studies should also control for prior activity on the day of testing and consider adding measurements of range of motion and additional flexibility measures, and/or also involve the upper body in the overall protocol.

This document is currently not available here.

Share

COinS