These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Acute effect of a ballistic and a static stretching exercise bout on flexibility and maximal strength.
    Author: Bacurau RF, Monteiro GA, Ugrinowitsch C, Tricoli V, Cabral LF, Aoki MS.
    Journal: J Strength Cond Res; 2009 Jan; 23(1):304-8. PubMed ID: 19057408.
    Abstract:
    Different stretching techniques have been used during warm-up routines. However, these routines may decrease force production. The purpose of this study was to compare the acute effect of a ballistic and a static stretching protocol on lower-limb maximal strength. Fourteen physically active women (169.3 +/- 8.2 cm; 64.9 +/- 5.9 kg; 23.1 +/- 3.6 years) performed three experimental sessions: a control session (estimation of 45 degrees leg press one-repetition maximum [1RM]), a ballistic session (20 minutes of ballistic stretch and 45 degrees leg press 1RM), and a static session (20 minutes of static stretch and 45 degrees leg press 1RM). Maximal strength decreased after static stretching (213.2 +/- 36.1 to 184.6 +/- 28.9 kg), but it was unaffected by ballistic stretching (208.4 +/- 34.8 kg). In addition, static stretching exercises produce a greater acute improvement in flexibility compared with ballistic stretching exercises. Consequently, static stretching may not be recommended before athletic events or physical activities that require high levels of force. On the other hand, ballistic stretching could be more appropriate because it seems less likely to decrease maximal strength.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]