Muscle stretching comprises various modalities that differ in methodological aspects and exert distinct acute and long-term effects on maximal range of motion (ROMmax) and muscle strength. This narrative review aims to (i) describe each stretching modality in detail, including current approaches to quantifying intensity and volume; (ii) examine how variations in these parameters influence acute and chronic adaptations in ROMmax and strength; and (iii) provide practical guidance by highlighting each method’s advantages, limitations, and effectiveness in achieving flexibility improvements with minimal strength compromise. The reviewed modalities include passive or active static stretching, dynamic or ballistic stretching, and proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation (PNF). Intensity is commonly measured as stretch-induced discomfort (static), movement velocity or frequency (dynamic/ballistic), or contraction effort (PNF). Volume is quantified as total time at a given %ROMmax (static), number of repetitions (dynamic/ballistic), or contraction-relaxation cycles (PNF). Passive static stretching is effective for increasing ROMmax but may transiently reduce maximal isometric strength, particularly with higher intensities and durations. Dynamic stretching improves ROMmax without affecting strength, while ballistic stretching carries a greater risk of strength impairment. PNF techniques enhance ROMmax across intensity levels, and modified protocols may reduce associated discomfort. Long-term stretching interventions improve flexibility without negatively impacting strength, supporting their strategic use in training. Static stretching may even produce small strength gains when sustained for at least eight weeks. While all modalities acutely enhance ROMmax, chronic effects vary depending on protocol design. Selecting an appropriate stretching technique should align with specific performance goals, particularly in sports requiring extreme ROMmax or when combined with resistance training. Practical considerations such as safety, control, and participant familiarity are essential for effective long-term program implementation.

Muscle stretching: exploring the impact of different modalities on maximal range of motion and strength with practical recommendations / S. Longo, E. Ce', N. Toninelli, F. Esposito, G. Coratella. - In: SPORTS MEDICINE - OPEN. - ISSN 2198-9761. - 11:(2025), pp. 126.1-126.18. [10.1186/s40798-025-00925-7]

Muscle stretching: exploring the impact of different modalities on maximal range of motion and strength with practical recommendations

S. Longo
Co-primo
;
E. Ce'
Co-primo
;
N. Toninelli;F. Esposito
Penultimo
;
G. Coratella
Ultimo
2025

Abstract

Muscle stretching comprises various modalities that differ in methodological aspects and exert distinct acute and long-term effects on maximal range of motion (ROMmax) and muscle strength. This narrative review aims to (i) describe each stretching modality in detail, including current approaches to quantifying intensity and volume; (ii) examine how variations in these parameters influence acute and chronic adaptations in ROMmax and strength; and (iii) provide practical guidance by highlighting each method’s advantages, limitations, and effectiveness in achieving flexibility improvements with minimal strength compromise. The reviewed modalities include passive or active static stretching, dynamic or ballistic stretching, and proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation (PNF). Intensity is commonly measured as stretch-induced discomfort (static), movement velocity or frequency (dynamic/ballistic), or contraction effort (PNF). Volume is quantified as total time at a given %ROMmax (static), number of repetitions (dynamic/ballistic), or contraction-relaxation cycles (PNF). Passive static stretching is effective for increasing ROMmax but may transiently reduce maximal isometric strength, particularly with higher intensities and durations. Dynamic stretching improves ROMmax without affecting strength, while ballistic stretching carries a greater risk of strength impairment. PNF techniques enhance ROMmax across intensity levels, and modified protocols may reduce associated discomfort. Long-term stretching interventions improve flexibility without negatively impacting strength, supporting their strategic use in training. Static stretching may even produce small strength gains when sustained for at least eight weeks. While all modalities acutely enhance ROMmax, chronic effects vary depending on protocol design. Selecting an appropriate stretching technique should align with specific performance goals, particularly in sports requiring extreme ROMmax or when combined with resistance training. Practical considerations such as safety, control, and participant familiarity are essential for effective long-term program implementation.
Settore MEDF-01/B - Metodi e didattiche delle attività sportive
Settore BIOS-06/A - Fisiologia
2025
https://sportsmedicine-open.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s40798-025-00925-7
Article (author)
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
s40798-025-00925-7.pdf

accesso aperto

Tipologia: Publisher's version/PDF
Licenza: Creative commons
Dimensione 1.98 MB
Formato Adobe PDF
1.98 MB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri
Pubblicazioni consigliate

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/2434/1193577
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus ND
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
  • OpenAlex ND
social impact