Maximal strength, number of repetitions , and total volume are differently affected by static-ballistic, and proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation stretching
Contribuinte(s) |
UNIVERSIDADE DE SÃO PAULO |
---|---|
Data(s) |
20/09/2013
20/09/2013
01/09/2012
|
Resumo |
Barroso, R, Tricoli, V, dos Santos Gil, S, Ugrinowitsch, C, and Roschel, H. Maximal strength, number of repetitions, and total volume are differently affected by static-, ballistic-, and proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation stretching. J Strength Cond Res 26(9): 2432-2437, 2012-Stretching exercises have been traditionally incorporated into warm-up routines before training sessions and sport events. However, the effects of stretching on maximal strength and strength endurance performance seem to depend on the type of stretching employed. The objective of this study was to compare the effects of static stretching (SS), ballistic stretching (BS), and proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation (PNF) stretching on maximal strength, number of repetitions at a submaximal load, and total volume (i.e., number of repetitions 3 external load) in a multiple-set resistance training bout. Twelve strength-trained men (20.4 +/- 4.5 years, 67.9 +/- 6.3 kg, 173.3 +/- 8.5 cm) volunteered to participate in this study. All of the subjects completed 8 experimental sessions. Four experimental sessions were designed to test maximal strength in the leg press (i.e., 1 repetition maximum [1RM]) after each stretching condition (SS, BS, PNF, or no-stretching [NS]). During the other 4 sessions, the number of repetitions performed at 80% 1RM was assessed after each stretching condition. All of the stretching protocols significantly improved the range of motion in the sit-and-reach test when compared with NS. Further, PNF induced greater changes in the sit-and-reach test than BS did (4.7 +/- 1.6, 2.9 +/- 1.5, and 1.9 +/- 1.4 cm for PNF, SS, and BS, respectively). Leg press 1RM values were decreased only after the PNF condition (5.5%, p < 0.001). All the stretching protocols significantly reduced the number of repetitions (SS: 20.8%, p < 0.001; BS: 17.8%, p = 0.01; PNF: 22.7%, p < 0.001) and total volume (SS: 20.4%, p < 0.001; BS: 17.9%, p = 0.01; PNF: 22.4%, p < 0.001) when compared with NS. The results from this study suggest that, to avoid a decrease in both the number of repetitions and total volume, stretching exercises should not be performed before a resistance training session. Additionally, strength-trained individuals may experience reduced maximal dynamic strength after PNF stretching. |
Identificador |
JOURNAL OF STRENGTH AND CONDITIONING RESEARCH, PHILADELPHIA, v. 26, n. 9, pp. 2432-2437, SEP, 2012 1064-8011 http://www.producao.usp.br/handle/BDPI/33555 10.1519/JSC.0b013e31823f2b4d |
Idioma(s) |
eng |
Publicador |
LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS PHILADELPHIA |
Relação |
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research |
Direitos |
restrictedAccess Copyright LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS |
Palavras-Chave | #TRAINING #SKELETAL MUSCLE #RANGE OF MOTION #STRUCTURES IN-VIVO #MUSCLE STRENGTH #PASSIVE STRETCH #MULTIPLE SETS #POWER OUTPUT #PEAK TORQUE #PERFORMANCE #RESISTANCE #EXERCISE #SINGLE #SPORT SCIENCES |
Tipo |
article original article publishedVersion |