Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023 Aug 29;15(1):106.
doi: 10.1186/s13102-023-00703-6.

A systematic review and net meta-analysis of the effects of different warm-up methods on the acute effects of lower limb explosive strength

F Y Li  1 , C G Guo  1 , H S Li  1 , H R Xu  1 , P Sun  2
Affiliations

A systematic review and net meta-analysis of the effects of different warm-up methods on the acute effects of lower limb explosive strength

F Y Li et al. BMC Sports Sci Med Rehabil. .

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the effects of different warm-up methods on the acute effect of lower limb explosive strength with the help of a reticulated meta-analysis system and to track the optimal method.

Methods: R software combined with Stata software, version 13.0, was used to analyse the outcome metrics of the 35 included papers. Mean differences (MD) were pooled using a random effects model.

Results: 1) Static combined with dynamic stretching [MD = 1.80, 95% CI: (0.43, 3.20)] and dynamic stretching [MD = 1.60, 95% CI: (0.67, 2.60)] were significantly better than controls in terms of improving countermovement jump height (cm), and the effect of dynamic stretching was influenced by the duration of stretching (I2 = 80.4%), study population (I2 = 77.2%) and age (I2 = 75.6%) as moderating variables, with the most significant effect size for dynamic stretching time of 7-10min. 2) Only dynamic stretching [MD = -0.08, 95% CI: (-0.15, -0.008)] was significantly better than the control group in terms of improving sprint time (s), while static stretching [MD = 0.07, 95% CI: (0.002, 0.13)] showed a significant, negative effect. 3) No results were available to demonstrate a significant difference between other methods, such as foam axis rolling, and the control group.

Conclusion: The results of this review indicate that static stretching reduced explosive performance, while the 2 warm-up methods, namely dynamic stretching and static combined with dynamic stretching, were able to significantly improve explosive performance, with dynamic stretching being the most stable and moderated by multiple variables and dynamic stretching for 7-10min producing the best explosive performance. In the future, high-quality studies should be added based on strict adherence to test specifications.

Keywords: Explosive lower limb strength; Jump height; Reticulation meta-analysis; Sprint time; Warm-up methods.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The author declare no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Flow diagram regarding article selection for meta-analysis
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Network diagram of the relationship between different warm-up methods on the explosive strength indicators of the lower limbs. Note: “SS” indicates static stretching, “DS” indicates dynamic stretching, “BS” indicates ballistic stretching, “PNF” indicates PNF stretching, “FR” indicates foam rolling, “SDS” indicates static-dynamic stretching, “CON” indicates control group, The unit of measurement of CMJ indicators is centimeter(cm), The unit of measurement of Sprint indicators is seconds(s)
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Brooks-Gelman-Rubin diagnostic chart
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
CMJ(cm) indicator forest chart
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Sprint(s) indicator forest chart
Fig. 6
Fig. 6
Cumulative ranking probability graph for CMJ indicators
Fig. 7
Fig. 7
Cumulative ranking probability chart for sprint indicators
Fig. 8
Fig. 8
Funnel plot of lower limb explosive strength-related indicators
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Xie YM, Gu JQ, Wang SW, et al. Study on the best stretching methods in pre-game preparation activities for female professional basketball players[J] J Beijing Sport Univ. 2018;41(12):117–122.
    1. Xiaoyang L, Leqin C. Research progress on the acute effects and mechanisms of muscle stretching on sports performance[J] J Hebei Inst Phys Educ. 2021;35(02):72–82.
    1. Jianfang G, Shan Li, Baofeng W. Effects of different stretching forms and delay times on the explosive strength of lower limbs[J] J Chengdu Inst Phys Educ. 2012;38(06):83–87.
    1. Pinto MD, Wilhelm EN, Tricoli V, et al. Differential effects of 30-vs. 60-second static muscle stretching on vertical jump performance[J] J Strength Cond Res. 2014;28(12):3440–3446. - PubMed
    1. Peck E, Chomko G, Gaz DV, et al. The effects of stretching on performance[J] Curr Sports Med Rep. 2014;13(3):179–185. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources