Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33329054›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in physiology2020

Effects of Static Stretching With High-Intensity and Short-Duration or Low-Intensity and Long-Duration on Range of Motion and Muscle Stiffness.

Taizan Fukaya, Ryosuke Kiyono, Shigeru Sato, Kaoru Yahata, Koki Yasaka, Remi Onuma, Masatoshi Nakamura

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in physiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Improvements in Flexibility Depend on Stretching Duration.International journal of exercise science · 2023
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Taizan FukayaInstitute for Human Movement and Medical Sciences, Niigata University of Health and Welfare, Niigata, Japan.
Ryosuke KiyonoInstitute for Human Movement and Medical Sciences, Niigata University of Health and Welfare, Niigata, Japan.
Shigeru SatoInstitute for Human Movement and Medical Sciences, Niigata University of Health and Welfare, Niigata, Japan.
Kaoru YahataInstitute for Human Movement and Medical Sciences, Niigata University of Health and Welfare, Niigata, Japan.
Koki YasakaDepartment of Physical Therapy, Niigata University of Health and Welfare, Niigata, Japan.
Remi OnumaDepartment of Physical Therapy, Niigata University of Health and Welfare, Niigata, Japan.
Masatoshi NakamuraInstitute for Human Movement and Medical Sciences, Niigata University of Health and Welfare, Niigata, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study investigated the effects of static stretching (SS) delivered with the same load but using two protocols - high-intensity and short-duration and low-intensity and long-duration - on range of motion (ROM) and muscle stiffness. A total of 18 healthy students participated in the study. They randomly performed high-intensity and short-duration (120% and 100 s) or low-intensity and long-duration (50% and 240 s) SS. Outcomes were assessed on ROM, passive torque at dorsiflexion ROM, and shear elastic modulus of the medial gastrocnemius before and after static stretching. The results showed that ROM increased significantly at post-stretching compared to that at pre-stretching in both high-intensity and short-duration [+6.1° ± 4.6° (Δ25.7 ± 19.9%)] and low-intensity and long-duration [+3.6° ± 2.3° (Δ16.0 ± 11.8%)]. Also, the ROM was significantly higher at post-stretching in high-intensity and short-duration conditions than that in low-intensity and long-duration. The passive torque at dorsiflexion ROM was significantly increased in both high-intensity and short-duration [+5.8 ± 12.8 Nm (Δ22.9 ± 40.5%)] and low-intensity and long-duration [+2.1 ± 3.4 Nm (Δ6.9 ± 10.8%)] conditions, but no significant differences were observed between both conditions. The shear elastic modulus was significantly decreased in both high-intensity and short-duration [-8.8 ± 6.1 kPa (Δ - 38.8 ± 14.5%)] and low-intensity and long-duration [-8.0 ± 12.8 kPa (Δ - 22.2 ± 33.8%)] conditions. Moreover, the relative change in shear elastic modulus in the high-intensity and short-duration SS was significantly greater than that in low-intensity and long-duration SS. Our results suggest that a higher intensity of the static stretching should be conducted to increase ROM and decrease muscle stiffness, even for a short time.

Indexed as

range of motionshear elastic modulusstatic stretchingstretching durationstretching intensitystretch tolerance

Identifiers

PMID33329054
PMCPMC7714915

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.