Discussing Conflicting Explanatory Approaches in Flexibility Training Under Consideration of Physiology: A Narrative Review

Konstantin Warneke,David G. Behm,Shahab Alizadeh,Martin Hillebrecht,Andreas Konrad,Klaus Wirth

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-024-02043-y

IF: 11.928

2024-06-01

Sports Medicine

Abstract:The mechanisms underlying range of motion enhancements via flexibility training discussed in the literature show high heterogeneity in research methodology and study findings. In addition, scientific conclusions are mostly based on functional observations while studies considering the underlying physiology are less common. However, understanding the underlying mechanisms that contribute to an improved range of motion through stretching is crucial for conducting comparable studies with sound designs, optimising training routines and accurately interpreting resulting outcomes. While there seems to be no evidence to attribute acute range of motion increases as well as changes in muscle and tendon stiffness and pain perception specifically to stretching or foam rolling, the role of general warm-up effects is discussed in this paper. Additionally, the role of mechanical tension applied to greater muscle lengths for range of motion improvement will be discussed. Thus, it is suggested that physical training stressors can be seen as external stimuli that control gene expression via the targeted stimulation of transcription factors, leading to structural adaptations due to enhanced protein synthesis. Hence, the possible role of serial sarcomerogenesis in altering pain perception, reducing muscle stiffness and passive torque, or changes in the optimal joint angle for force development is considered as well as alternative interventions with a potential impact on anabolic pathways. As there are limited possibilities to directly measure serial sarcomere number, longitudinal muscle hypertrophy remains without direct evidence. The available literature does not demonstrate the necessity of only using specific flexibility training routines such as stretching to enhance acute or chronic range of motion.

sport sciences

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

The paper primarily explores the effects of different methods in flexibility training (such as stretching, foam rolling, etc.) on the range of motion (ROM) and their potential physiological mechanisms, and attempts to address the following core issues:

1. **Understanding the mechanisms behind ROM improvement**: There is a high degree of heterogeneity in the literature regarding the mechanisms by which flexibility training improves ROM. This paper attempts to integrate existing research findings and propose an explanation based on biological and systemic levels.

2. **Evaluating the effectiveness of different training methods**: The paper discusses various training methods, including stretching and foam rolling, and their effects on acute (immediate) and chronic (long-term) increases in ROM, comparing their similarities and differences.

3. **Exploring the role of general warm-up effects**: The study suggests that the increase in ROM caused by many training methods may not be solely attributed to the specific training techniques themselves but also to general warm-up effects, such as the increase in muscle temperature.

4. **The role of mechanical tension in long-term ROM increase**: The paper hypothesizes that mechanical tension applied at longer muscle lengths may be one of the key factors in long-term ROM increase. This involves the molecular mechanisms of muscle adaptability changes, such as serial sarcomerogenesis.

In summary, this paper attempts to synthesize existing literature to provide a more comprehensive perspective on understanding and optimizing flexibility training, particularly from a physiological standpoint, exploring the commonalities and differences in the effects of different training methods on ROM.