Suppr超能文献

静态拉伸训练与泡沫轴滚动训练对运动范围的影响:系统评价和荟萃分析。

Static Stretch Training versus Foam Rolling Training Effects on Range of Motion: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

机构信息

Institute of Human Movement Science, Sport and Health, Graz University, Mozartgasse 14, 8010, Graz, Austria.

School of Human Kinetics and Recreation, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's, NL, Canada.

出版信息

Sports Med. 2024 Sep;54(9):2311-2326. doi: 10.1007/s40279-024-02041-0. Epub 2024 May 17.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Long-term static stretching as well as foam rolling training can increase a joint's range of motion (ROM). However, to date, it is not clear which method is the most effective for increasing ROM.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare the effects of static stretching and foam rolling training on ROM.

METHODS

The literature search was performed in PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science to find the eligible studies. Eighty-five studies (72 on static stretching; and 13 on foam rolling) were found to be eligible with 204 effect sizes (ESs). For the main analyses, a random-effect meta-analysis was applied. To assess the difference between static stretching and foam rolling, subgroup analyses with a mixed-effect model were applied. Moderating variables were sex, total intervention duration, and weeks of intervention.

RESULTS

Static stretch (ES =  - 1.006; p < 0.001), as well as foam rolling training (ES =  - 0.729; p = 0.001), can increase joint ROM with a moderate magnitude compared with a control condition. However, we did not detect a significant difference between the two conditions in the subgroup analysis (p = 0.228). When the intervention duration was ≤ 4 weeks, however, a significant change in ROM was shown following static stretching (ES =  - 1.436; p < 0.001), but not following foam rolling (ES =  - 0.229; p = 0.248). Thus, a subgroup analysis indicated a significant favorable effect with static stretching for increasing ROM compared with foam rolling (p < 0.001) over a shorter term (≤ 4 weeks). Other moderator analyses showed no significant difference between static stretch and foam rolling training on ROM.

CONCLUSIONS

According to the results, both static stretching and foam rolling training can be similarly recommended to increase joint ROM, unless the training is scheduled for ≤ 4 weeks, in which case static stretching demonstrates a significant advantage. More studies are needed with a high-volume foam rolling training approach as well as foam rolling training in exclusively female participants.

摘要

背景

长期的静态伸展和泡沫轴滚动训练都可以增加关节的活动范围(ROM)。然而,迄今为止,哪种方法对增加 ROM 最有效还不清楚。

目的

本系统评价和荟萃分析的目的是比较静态伸展和泡沫轴滚动训练对 ROM 的影响。

方法

在 PubMed、Scopus 和 Web of Science 中进行文献检索,以查找符合条件的研究。共发现 85 项研究(72 项为静态伸展,13 项为泡沫轴滚动)符合条件,有 204 个效应量(ES)。主要分析采用随机效应荟萃分析。为了评估静态伸展和泡沫轴滚动之间的差异,采用混合效应模型进行亚组分析。调节变量为性别、总干预时间和干预周数。

结果

与对照组相比,静态伸展(ES=-1.006;p<0.001)和泡沫轴滚动训练(ES=-0.729;p=0.001)都可以适度增加关节 ROM。然而,在亚组分析中,我们没有发现两种情况之间有显著差异(p=0.228)。当干预时间≤4 周时,与泡沫轴滚动(ES=-0.229;p=0.248)相比,静态伸展后 ROM 有显著变化(ES=-1.436;p<0.001)。因此,亚组分析表明,在较短时间(≤4 周)内,与泡沫轴滚动相比,静态伸展对增加 ROM 有显著的有利影响(p<0.001)。其他调节因素分析表明,在 ROM 方面,静态伸展和泡沫轴滚动训练之间没有显著差异。

结论

根据研究结果,无论是静态伸展还是泡沫轴滚动训练都可以推荐用于增加关节 ROM,除非训练计划在 4 周内,否则静态伸展具有明显优势。需要进行更多研究,包括采用高容量泡沫轴滚动训练方法和仅针对女性参与者的泡沫轴滚动训练。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/42c5/11393112/54c1d118acbb/40279_2024_2041_Fig1_HTML.jpg

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验