Warneke Konstantin, Zechner Maximilian, Siegel Stanislav D, Jochum Daniel, Brunssen Leefke, Konrad Andreas
Institute of Human Movement Science, Sport and Health, University of Graz, Graz, Austria.
Department for Human Motion Science and Exercise Physiology, University of Jena, Jena, Germany.
Sports Med Open. 2025 May 30;11(1):61. doi: 10.1186/s40798-025-00859-0.
Running economy (RE) determines the performance of endurance athletes. While stretching has been practised for decades, and is still one common integral component of warm-up routine, muscle stretching is also associated with decreased stiffness. For RE energy storage in the tendons which is accompanied with stiffness is of crucial importance. In turn, avoidance of pre-running stretching was frequently recommended. Although some studies supported this recommendation, the evidence is controversial. Nevertheless, yet, no systematic review on the effects of stretching on RE with effect size (ES) quantification was performed. Consequently, with this systematic review with meta-analysis, we aim to provide the first overview on this topic.
In adherence to PRISMA 2020 guidelines, we meta-analyzed effect sizes from three databases using PICOS guidelines on stretching effects on RE in healthy participants using robust variance estimation. Heterogeneity was reduced using subgroup analyses while meta-regression evaluated whether running velocity potentially moderates results. Risk of Bias was assessed using the PEDro scale, certainty of evidence was classified via GRADE working group criteria. The study protocol was registered in Open Science Framework https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/MA8D4 ).
Overall, low certainty of evidence pooled from 15 studies with a total of 181 participants indicated that stretching did not significantly moderate RE acutely (p = 0.21-0.65), neither in general, nor were there any stretching types (dynamic, static and proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation) that affected this result. Due to the limited number of chronic studies found in the literature, long-term stretching effects were exclusively evaluated qualitatively. Meaningful heterogeneity and reduced methodological quality (PEDro Score: 4.88, fair) contributed to certainty of evidence downgrading.
In contrast to common beliefs that stretching decreased stiffness parameters and would therefore hamper RE, current evidence does not support any effect of stretching on RE in running athletes. However, several flaws such as no investigation of the underlying mechanisms (e.g., stiffness), small sample sizes, determining RE at different velocities, and the implementation of unreasonable stretching durations strongly biased conclusions. Especially on chronic effects there is a large demand for improved evidence, including underlying mechanisms investigation. Yet, it seems unreasonable to avoid pre-running stretching to prevent RE decreases.
跑步经济性(RE)决定耐力运动员的表现。尽管拉伸已被实践数十年,并且仍然是热身常规的一个常见组成部分,但肌肉拉伸也与僵硬程度降低有关。对于RE而言,肌腱中的能量储存伴随着僵硬程度,这至关重要。相应地,经常有人建议避免跑步前进行拉伸。尽管一些研究支持这一建议,但证据存在争议。然而,尚未对拉伸对RE的影响进行过系统评价并量化效应大小(ES)。因此,通过这项系统评价和荟萃分析,我们旨在提供关于该主题的首个综述。
遵循PRISMA 2020指南,我们使用PICOS指南对来自三个数据库的效应大小进行荟萃分析,该指南涉及拉伸对健康参与者RE的影响,并采用稳健方差估计。通过亚组分析减少异质性,同时进行荟萃回归以评估跑步速度是否可能调节结果。使用PEDro量表评估偏倚风险,通过GRADE工作组标准对证据的确定性进行分类。研究方案已在开放科学框架https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/MA8D4 中注册。
总体而言,从15项研究共181名参与者中汇总的证据确定性较低,表明拉伸一般不会急性显著调节RE(p = 0.21 - 0.65),也没有任何拉伸类型(动态、静态和本体感觉神经肌肉促进)会影响这一结果。由于文献中发现的慢性研究数量有限,仅对长期拉伸效应进行了定性评估。有意义的异质性和方法学质量的降低(PEDro评分:4.88,中等)导致证据确定性降级。
与普遍认为拉伸会降低僵硬参数从而阻碍RE的观点相反,目前的证据不支持拉伸对跑步运动员的RE有任何影响。然而,存在一些缺陷,如未研究潜在机制(如僵硬程度)、样本量小、在不同速度下测定RE以及实施不合理的拉伸持续时间,这些严重影响了结论。特别是对于慢性影响,对改进证据的需求很大,包括对潜在机制的研究。然而,为防止RE降低而避免跑步前拉伸似乎不合理。