Clinical Physiology and Functional Imaging

Volume 35, Issue 6
Original Article

Responses to static stretching are dependent on stretch intensity and duration

Sandro R. Freitas

Corresponding Author

Fac Motricidade Humana, Universidade de Lisboa, CIPER, Lisbon, Portugal

Correspondence

Sandro Remo Martins Neves Ramos Freitas, Departamento de Desporto e Saúde, Faculdade de Motricidade Humana, Universidade de Lisboa, Estrada da Costa, 14499‐002 Cruz Quebrada, Portugal

E‐mail: sfreitas@fmh.ulisboa.pt

Search for more papers by this author
Daniel Vilarinho

Fac Motricidade Humana, Universidade de Lisboa, CIPER, Lisbon, Portugal

Search for more papers by this author
João Rocha Vaz

Fac Motricidade Humana, Universidade de Lisboa, CIPER, Lisbon, Portugal

Search for more papers by this author
Paula M. Bruno

Fac Motricidade Humana, Universidade de Lisboa, CIPER, Lisbon, Portugal

Search for more papers by this author
Pablo B. Costa

Exercise Physiology Laboratory, Department of Kinesiology, California State University–Fullerton, CA, USA

Search for more papers by this author
Pedro Mil‐homens

Fac Motricidade Humana, Universidade de Lisboa, CIPER, Lisbon, Portugal

Search for more papers by this author
First published: 27 August 2014
Cited by: 14

Summary

Information regarding the effects of stretching intensity on the joint torque–angle response is scarce. The present study examined the effects of three static stretching protocols with different intensities and durations on the passive knee extension torque–angle response of seventeen male participants (age ± SD: 23·9 ± 3·6 years, height: 177·0 ± 7·2 cm, BMI: 22·47 ± 1·95 kg·m2). The stretching intensity was determined according to the maximal tolerable torque of the first repetition: fifty per cent (P50), seventy‐five per cent (P75) and the maximum intensity without pain (P100). Five repetitions were performed for each protocol. The stretch duration of each repetition was 90, 135 and 180 s for P100, P75 and P50, respectively. The rest period between repetitions was 30 s. Passive torque at a given angle, angle, stress relaxation, area under the curve, surface electromyography activity and visual analogue scale score were compared. The significant (P<0·05) results found were as follows: (i) the P50 and P75 did not increase the angle and passive peak torque outcomes, despite more time under stretch; (ii) only the P100 increased the angle and passive peak torque outcomes; (iii) the perception of stretching intensity mainly changed depending on knee angle changes, and not passive torque; (iv) the P50 induced a higher passive torque decrease; (v) when protocols were compared for the same time under stretch, the torque decrease was similar; (vi) the change in torque–angle curve shape was different depending on the stretching protocol. In conclusion, higher stretch duration seems to be a crucial factor for passive torque decrease and higher stretch intensity for maximum angle increase.

The full text of this article hosted at iucr.org is unavailable due to technical difficulties.