Suppr超能文献

动态拉伸和爆发式拉伸对柔韧性的急性影响:一项系统综述与荟萃分析

Acute Effects of Dynamic and Ballistic Stretching on Flexibility: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

作者信息

Matsuo Shingo, Takeuchi Kosuke, Nakamura Masatoshi, Fukaya Taizan, Oba Kensuke, Nakao Gakuto, Mizuno Takamasa

机构信息

Department of Rehabilitation, Faculty of Health Sciences, Nihon Fukushi University, Handa, Aichi, Japan.

Department of Physical Therapy, Faculty of Rehabilitation, Kobe International University, Kobe, Hyogo, Japan.

出版信息

J Sports Sci Med. 2025 Jun 1;24(2):463-474. doi: 10.52082/jssm.2025.463. eCollection 2025 Jun.

Abstract

Dynamic stretching (DS) uses a controlled movement through the range of motion (ROM) of the active joint(s) by contracting the agonist muscles without being held in an end position. In contrast, ballistic stretching (BS) typically uses uncontrolled movements of a higher velocity with bouncing actions. However, BS is often considered to be a form of DS. When considered together, DS and BS reportedly increase flexibility, evidenced by single- and multiple-joint ROM improvements and other measurements. However, a meta-analysis with subgroup analyses revealing the acute effects of DS and BS on flexibility in detail, independently of other stretching methods, has yet to be conducted. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to investigate the acute effects of DS and BS on flexibility in healthy participants. The PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus databases were searched for eligible papers published before September 9, 2024; 17 papers were included in the meta-analysis. The main meta-analysis was performed with a random-effect model, and subgroup analyses were performed to examine the effects of age (young vs. middle-aged and older), sex (male vs. mixed sex), stretching methods (DS vs. BS), stretched muscles (hamstrings vs. plantar flexors vs. multiple muscles), and flexibility outcomes (single-joint ROM vs. straight-leg raise test vs. sit-and-reach test). A small increase in flexibility was found following DS and BS (considered together) (effect size = 0.372, Z = 3.936, 95% confidence interval = 0.187-0.557, p < 0.001, I = 27%). Subgroup analyses revealed no significant differences between age (p = 0.24), sex (p = 0.76), stretching method (p = 0.83), stretched muscle (p = 0.20), or flexibility outcome (p = 0.34) groups. Our results suggest that DS and BS effectively provide acute, small-magnitude improvements in flexibility that are not significantly affected by individual characteristics, stretching methods, stretched muscles, or flexibility outcomes.

摘要

动态拉伸(DS)通过收缩主动肌,在活动关节的运动范围(ROM)内进行可控运动,且不保持在终末位置。相比之下,弹道式拉伸(BS)通常采用速度更高且带有弹跳动作的不可控运动。然而,BS常被视为DS的一种形式。综合来看,据报道DS和BS可提高柔韧性,单关节和多关节ROM的改善以及其他测量结果都证明了这一点。然而,尚未进行过一项亚组分析的荟萃分析,以详细揭示DS和BS对柔韧性的急性影响,且独立于其他拉伸方法。本荟萃分析的目的是研究DS和BS对健康参与者柔韧性的急性影响。在PubMed、科学网和Scopus数据库中检索了2024年9月9日前发表的符合条件的论文;17篇论文纳入了荟萃分析。主要荟萃分析采用随机效应模型进行,亚组分析则用于检验年龄(年轻与中年及老年)、性别(男性与混合性别)、拉伸方法(DS与BS)、拉伸肌肉(腘绳肌与跖屈肌与多块肌肉)以及柔韧性结果(单关节ROM与直腿抬高试验与坐位体前屈试验)的影响。DS和BS(综合考虑)后发现柔韧性有小幅增加(效应量 = 0.372,Z = 3.936,95%置信区间 = 0.187 - 0.557,p < 0.001,I² = 27%)。亚组分析显示年龄组(p = 0.24)、性别组(p = 0.76)、拉伸方法组(p = 0.83)、拉伸肌肉组(p = 0.20)或柔韧性结果组(p = 0.34)之间无显著差异。我们的结果表明,DS和BS能有效提供急性、小幅的柔韧性改善,且不受个体特征、拉伸方法、拉伸肌肉或柔韧性结果的显著影响。

相似文献

本文引用的文献

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验