This article was downloaded by: [Syracuse University Library]

On: 27 April 2013, At: 14:27

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,
37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Journal of Sports Sciences

Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rjsp20

Acute effects of static and dynamic stretching on

hamstring eccentric isokinetic strength and unilateral
hamstring to quadriceps strength ratios
a b c d
Francisco Ayala , Mark De Ste Croix , Pilar Sainz De Baranda & Fernando Santonja
a
Sports Research Centre, Miguel Hernandez University of Elche, Spain
b
Faculty of Applied Sciences, School of Sport and Exercise, University of Gloucestershire,
Gloucester, United Kingdom
c
Faculty of Sport and Physical Education of Toledo, University of Castilla La Mancha, Spain
d
Department of Traumatology, Faculty of Medicine, V. de la Arrixaca University Hospital,
Murcia, Spain
Version of record first published: 12 Dec 2012.

To cite this article: Francisco Ayala , Mark De Ste Croix , Pilar Sainz De Baranda & Fernando Santonja (2013): Acute effects
of static and dynamic stretching on hamstring eccentric isokinetic strength and unilateral hamstring to quadriceps strength
ratios, Journal of Sports Sciences, 31:8, 831-839

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02640414.2012.751119

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic
reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to
anyone is expressly forbidden.

The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents
will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae, and drug doses should
be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims,
proceedings, demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in
connection with or arising out of the use of this material.
 Journal of Sports Sciences, 2013
Vol. 31, No. 8, 831–839, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02640414.2012.751119

Acute effects of static and dynamic stretching on hamstring eccentric

isokinetic strength and unilateral hamstring to quadriceps strength
ratios

FRANCISCO AYALA1, MARK DE STE CROIX2, PILAR SAINZ DE BARANDA3, &

FERNANDO SANTONJA4
1
Sports Research Centre, Miguel Hernandez University of Elche, Spain, 2Faculty of Applied Sciences, School of Sport and
Exercise, University of Gloucestershire, Gloucester, United Kingdom, 3Faculty of Sport and Physical Education of Toledo,
University of Castilla La Mancha, Spain, and 4Department of Traumatology, Faculty of Medicine, V. de la Arrixaca
University Hospital, Murcia, Spain
Downloaded by [Syracuse University Library] at 14:27 27 April 2013

(Accepted 15 November 2012)

Abstract
The main purposes of this study were to investigate the acute effects of static and dynamic lower limb stretching routines: (a)
on peak torque, total external work and joint angle at peak torque of the hamstrings during maximal eccentric isokinetic leg
flexion; (b) on unilateral hamstring to quadriceps (H/Q) strength ratios; as well as (c) to determine whether static and
dynamic routines elicit similar responses. A total of 49 active adults completed the following intervention protocols in a
randomised order on separate days: (a) non-stretching (control condition), (b) static stretching, and (c) dynamic stretching.
After the stretching or control intervention, eccentric isokinetic peak torque, the angle of peak torque and total external work
were assessed with participants prone at 1.04 and 3.14 rad  s71. Unilateral strength ratios of the knee were also recorded.
Measures were compared via a fully-within-groups factorial analysis of variance (ANOVA). There were no main effects for
eccentric isokinetic peak torque, angle of peak torque, total external work and unilateral H/Q strength ratios. The results
suggest that dynamic and static stretching has no influence on eccentric strength profile and unilateral H/Q strength ratios
and hence both forms of stretching do not reduce these two primary risk factors for muscle injury.

Keywords: strength training, isokinetic, knee, muscle strains, torque

Thacker, Gilchrist, Stroup, & Kimsey, 2004; Woods,

Introduction
Stretching activities before exercise are thought to
prepare the musculo-skeletal system for physical
activity and sport events by improving joint range
of motion (Kubo, Kanehisa, & Fukinaga, 2002), thus
promoting improved performance (Shellock & Pre-
ntice, 1985) and reducing the relative risk of injury
(Croisier, Forthomme, Namurois, Vanderthommen,
& Crielaard, 2002; Witvrouw, Mahieu, Danneels, &
McNair, 2004). Consequently, athletes, coaches and
sport practitioners regularly include stretching ex-
ercises both in training programmes and in pre-event
warm-up activities (Gleim & McHugh, 1997).
Recent literature has questioned the traditional
hypothesis that supported the practice of pre-exercise
stretching as a preventive measure to reduce the
relative risk of injury (McHugh & Cosgrave, 2010;
Bishop, & Jones, 2007). In addition, some authors
have suggested that pre-event stretching might
increase the risk of injury arguing that stretching
could compromise muscle strength (Shrier, 1999;
Weldon & Hill, 2003). However, neither the recent
hypothesis nor the traditional suggestion regarding
the role of pre-exercise stretching as a preventive
measure to reduce the relative risk of injury have
been verified because of the inappropriate design of
the studies that have addressed this controversial
issue. For instance, Shrier (1999) and Woods et al.
(2007) pointed out that the studies that have
addressed the effects of stretching for injury risk
reduction prior to exercise have used protocols with
poor definitions of stretching protocols (intensity,
exercises) and used excessive stretching demands
(frequency and duration of stretching sessions

Correspondence: Francisco Ayala, Centro de Investigación del Deporte, Universidad Miguel Hernández de Elche, Avda. de la Universidad s/n., 03202 Elche,
Alicante, Spain. E-mail: Franciscoayalarodriguez@gmail.com

© 2013 Taylor & Francis

 832 F. Ayala et al.
performed per week). Another potential limitation of
these studies is that they investigated the effect of
stretching on the rate of total injuries and the effect
of stretching on the occurrence of a specific type of
injury has not been explored.
To elucidate the role of pre-exercise stretching on
injury prevention, a recent literature review by
McHugh and Cosgrave (2010) stated that injury
risk in sports is multi-factorial and, in general, is
sport specific. Therefore the effects of pre-exercise
stretching on the likelihood of sustaining an injury
should be analysed in relation to the specific type of
injury (i.e. muscle strains, ligament tears) and focus
on a particular primary risk factor associated with
that injury. Furthermore, Young and Behm (2002)
have also suggested that stretching protocols should
Downloaded by [Syracuse University Library] at 14:27 27 April 2013
be representative of typical warm-ups used by
athletes and recreationally active people to prepare
for exercise or competition to make evidence-based
recommendations.
Several epidemiologic studies have reported that
hamstring muscle-tendon strain is one of the most
common injuries in sports involving activities with a
high intensity of stretch-shortening cycles (i.e.
soccer, basketball, volleyball) and including sudden
acceleration and deceleration, rapid changes of
directions, jumping and landing tasks (Agel, Arendt,
& Bershadsky, 2005; Bahr & Krosshaug, 2005;
Hootman, Dick, & Agel, 2007). Injury incidence
data have indicated that hamstring strains tend to
occur during the later part of the swing phase of
running when the hamstrings are exercising eccen-
trically (energy absorption) to decelerate the knee
extension movement generated by the quadriceps,
that is, as the muscle develops tension while
lengthening to stabilise the knee joint (Bahr &
Krosshaug, 2005; Sherry & Best, 2004). It has
been suggested that it is during this rapid eccentric
muscle action, when the hamstrings are in a relatively
stretched position compared with the anatomical
position (angles ranging from 408 to 08 of knee
flexion), that the muscle is most vulnerable to injury
(Beynnon, Johnson, Abate, Fleming, & Nichols,
2005; Solomorrow, Baratta, & D’Ambrosia, 1989).
It has therefore been postulated that eccentric
strength deficits and unilateral hamstring to quad-
riceps strength imbalance ratios (H/Q ratios) are one
of the most important characteristics of hamstring
strains in recreational and competitive athletes
(Croisier, 2004; Worrell & Perrin, 1992).
Whether pre-exercise stretching induces changes
in the eccentric strength of hamstrings, such as peak
force occurring at a joint angle corresponding to a
shorter muscle length that is not optimal and/or
causes a reduction of energy absorption capacity of
the muscle-tendon unit (area under length-tension
relationship) remains to be quantified. If these
changes do occur it may predispose the athlete to
be more prone to hamstring strains (Brockett,
Morgan, & Proske, 2004; Witvrouw et al., 2004).
Additionally, it is unclear if stretching impairs
unilateral H/Q ratios and increases the risk of
hamstring strains.
There are various stretching techniques, including
ballistic, proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation,
static and dynamic stretching (Alter, 1997; Hedrick,
2000). Among these, static and dynamic stretching
techniques are widely used in sport because the
application of this type of stretching is easy, safe and
assistance is not required (Alter, 1997; Hedrick,
2000). To our knowledge, no studies have investi-
gated the acute effects of pre-exercise static and
dynamic stretching on hamstring eccentric strength.
In addition, few studies have determined the acute
effects of pre-exercise stretching on unilateral
strength ratios, and those data that are available are
conflicting (Costa et al., 2009a, 2009b).
Therefore, the main purposes of this study were to
investigate acute effects of static and dynamic lower
limb stretching routines: (a) on peak torque, total
external work and joint angle at peak torque of the
hamstrings during maximal eccentric isokinetic leg
flexion; (b) on unilateral H/Q strength ratios; and (c)
determine whether static and dynamic routines elicit
similar responses.
Method
Participants
Forty-nine participants, consisting of 25 men (age ¼
21.3 + 2.5 years; stature ¼ 176.3 + 8.4 cm; body
mass ¼ 74.4 + 10.8 kg) and 24 women (age ¼
20.4 + 1.8 years; stature ¼ 164.7 + 7.6 cm; body
mass ¼ 62.9 + 8.6 kg) who were recreationally ac-
tive adults (engaging in 2–5 hours of moderate
physical activity 3–5 days per week) completed the
current study. Participants were instructed to avoid
their regular training throughout the experimental
period and refrain from vigorous physical activity 48
hours before each testing day.
Other exclusion criteria were: (1) histories of
orthopaedic problems, such as episodes of ham-
strings injury, fractures, surgery or pain in the spine
or hamstring muscles over the past six months; (2)
missing one testing session during the data collection
phase; and (3) presence of delayed onset muscle
soreness at any testing session to avoid the effects of
muscle soreness on muscle lengthening and force
production. The women were not in the ovulation
phase (days 10–14) of their menstrual cycle during
testing (Bell et al., 2009; Eiling, Bryant, Petersen,
Murphy, & Hohmann, 2007) as fluctuating concen-
trations of oestrogen throughout the menstrual cycle

affect musculotendonous stiffness (Eiling et al.,
2007) and joint laxity (Romani, Patrie, Curl, &
Flaws, 2003). Specifically, stiffness decreases during
ovulation in contrast to the menstrual and follicular
phases (Bell et al., 2009). All exclusion criteria were
evaluated by two experienced physical therapists
based in a sport practice and using a medical history
questionnaire. None of the participants reported any
form of musculoskeletal disorder at the time of
testing. The participants were verbally informed
about the study procedures before testing and
provided written informed consent. This study was
approved by the University of Gloucestershire
Research Ethics Committee (United Kingdom).
Research design
Downloaded by [Syracuse University Library] at 14:27 27 April 2013
A crossover-study design, in which participants
performed all experimental conditions, investigated
the aims of the current study. Use of a pre- and post-
test design, in which participants performed a pre-
and post-stretch isokinetic assessment was not
adopted because in a pilot study participants
reported that the testing procedure was too long
and subsequently they felt less able to undertake the
post-stretch assessment and hence, bias the results.
In addition, some participants reported musculoske-
letal fatigue during the post-stretch assessment.
Therefore, to ensure the optimal preparedness state
of each participant throughout the testing procedure,
the current study used a crossover design.
Participants visited the laboratory on four occa-
sions with 72–96 hours rest between testing sessions.
Furthermore, to minimise circadian and other
similar effects on performance, each participant
carried out all testing sessions at the same time of
day and under the same environmental conditions
(room temperature at 258C). The choice of 72–96
hours between testing sessions was because a
minimum of 36–48 hours rest interval is necessary
to restore optimal muscle function after a light bout
of strength training (Bompa, 2000). The first visit
Figure 1. Stretching exercises (left to right: quadriceps, psoas, adductors, hamstrings and gluteus).
Stretching on hamstring strength profile 833
was a practice session, and the subsequent three
visits were the experimental sessions. Practice
included anthropometry (body mass and stature)
followed by habituation to the isokinetic test proce-
dures that were completed during the experimental
sessions. In addition, the stretching exercises were
performed during the practice session to accustom
participants to the static and dynamic stretching
techniques. During the experimental sessions, the
order of stretching (static and dynamic) and non-
stretching conditions was randomised (using the
software at http://www.randomizer.org). The acute
effects of stretching sessions on torque and external
work were compared with the control condition (no-
stretching).
A single-joint isokinetic testing procedure deter-
mined eccentric strength of the hamstrings after
different treatment conditions (stretching [static and
dynamic] vs. non-stretching) to ensure that any
differences identified between experimental sessions
were attributable to the stretching protocol. The
single-joint study design reduced possible alterations
in intramuscular coordination that can change
strength when multi-joint movements, such as the
vertical jump, are used as the measure of muscular
performance (Manoel, Harris-Love, Danoff, & Mill-
er, 2008).
Stretching protocols
In each stretching session, participants performed
five un-assisted stretching exercises designed to
stretch the major muscle groups used during
running (gluteus, psoas, adductors, hamstrings and
quadriceps) and reflect the stretching typically
performed by athletes and recreationally active
people (Figure 1). The static and dynamic stretching
sessions differed only in the stretch technique used;
whereas the other stretching load characteristics
(duration, intensity, repetition and exercise posi-
tions) were identical. The stretching exercises were
performed twice in a randomised order under the
 834 F. Ayala et al.
direct supervision and guidance of the investigators.
Each stretching exercise was completed on the right
and left limb before another exercise was performed.
No rest interval was allowed between limbs, although
a 20-s rest period was allowed between stretch
repetitions and exercises (once the leg was returned
to a neutral position). The intensity of stretching was
self-determined but set to the threshold of mild
discomfort, not pain, as acknowledged by the
participant.
During the static stretching session, participants
were asked to hold each stretch position for 30 s.
During the dynamic stretching session, participants
were instructed to perform 15 continuous controlled
dynamic movements from the neutral stance to the
end of the range of movement. A rate of one stretch
Downloaded by [Syracuse University Library] at 14:27 27 April 2013
cycle every 2 s was set and the movements were at a
controlled speed throughout the range of move-
ments. In addition, during dynamic stretching,
participants were instructed that the end position
should be the same as the end position during static
stretching.
Stretch durations of 2630 s and 2615 dynamic
movements were performed because: (a) they prob-
ably reflect the stretching duration and volume
typically performed by athletes and recreationally
active people before training and/or competitions
(Young & Behm, 2002; Zakas, Doganis, Galazoulas,
& Vamvakoudis, 2006) and (b) they have been
shown to be effective in temporarily increasing the
functional joint range of motion (Ogura, Miyahara,
Naito, Katamoto, & Auki, 2007; Zakas, Galazoulas,
Zakas, Vamvakoudis, & Vergou, 2005).
Isokinetic testing
A Biodex System-3 Isokinetic dynamometer (Biodex
Corp., Shirley, NY, USA) and its respective manu-
facture software were used to determine isokinetic
peak torque and external work during knee extension
and flexion movements. The dynamometer was
calibrated according to the manufacturer’s instruc-
tions immediately before each test session and
verified immediately after to ensure that no changes
occurred in sensitivity. Calibration and calibration
verification procedures were conducted using known
weights to assess the reliability of torque, velocity and
position measurement (Drouin, Valovich, Shultz,
Gansneder, & Perrin, 2004).
Two minutes after stretching or control treatments
were completed, maximal concentric and eccentric
isokinetic peak torque for knee flexion and extension
of the dominant leg, determined through interview
and defined as leg preference when kicking a ball, was
tested. Participants were secured in a prone position
on the dynamometer with the hip passively flexed at
10–208 and the head maintained erect. The axis of
rotation of the dynamometer lever arm was aligned
with the lateral epicondyle of the knee. The force pad
was placed approximately 3 cm superior to the
medial malleolus with the foot in a relaxed position.
Adjustable strapping across the pelvis, posterior thigh
proximal to the knee and foot localised the action of
the musculature involved. The range of movement
was set from 08 (08 was determined as maximal
voluntary knee extension for each participant) to 908
knee flexion. All settings, including seat height, seat
length, dynamometer height and lever arm length,
were noted during the practice session so that they
were identical throughout experimental trials. During
the isokinetic testing procedure, the cushion setting
on the control panel for the ends of the range of
motion was set to its lowest (hardest) setting to
reduce the effect of limb deceleration on the
reciprocal motion (Taylor, Sanders, Howick, &
Stanley, 1991). The prone position (10–208 hip
flexion) was selected instead of a seated position
(80–1108 hip flexion) for two main reasons: (a) the
prone position is more representative of the hip
position during running/sprinting than a seated
position; and (b) being prone replicates knee flexor
and extensor muscle length-tension relationships that
occur in the late phase and the early contact phase of
sprinting (Worrell, Perrin, & Denegar, 1989; Wor-
rell, Denegar, Armstrong, & Perrin, 1990).
Participants warmed-up by performing four sub-
maximal (self-perceived 50% effort) and two max-
imal concentric (1.04 rad  s71) and eccentric (1.04
rad  s71) actions of the thigh muscles (reciprocal for
quadriceps and hamstrings) before each isokinetic
assessment. The isokinetic testing was separated into
two parts with concentric extension and flexion
torque determined using concentric/concentric cy-
cles before eccentric torque was determined using
eccentric/eccentric cycles. For both muscle actions,
two cycles of knee flexion and extension were
performed at two preset constant angular velocities
in the following order: 1.04 and 3.14 rad  s71 (slow
to fast). When a variation greater than 5% occurred
in the peak torque scores between cycles at the same
speed, an extra cycle was performed and the two
most related cycles were used for subsequent
statistical analyses.
The slower angular velocity was performed before
the high speed as this facilitates learning during
assessments at high angular velocities of the knee.
Pilot work showed that participants could not
maintain the required torque output throughout the
range of motion in the reactive eccentric mode,
subsequently causing stalling of the lever arm.
Therefore, the passive eccentric mode was chosen
so that the full range of movement would be
completed for every action, which is important for
the calculation of the angle-torque curve.

Furthermore, this study used continuous concentric/
concentric and eccentric/eccentric cycles because
they made the movement easier to understand and
perform than the concentric/eccentric cycles (Kellis,
Kellis, Gerodimos, & Manou, 1999). Moreover, it
has been suggested that a concentric/eccentric
testing method could be physically more demanding
because the same muscle is tested continuously
(Houweling, Head, & Hamzeh, 2009). The two
testing parts (concentric/concentric and eccentric/
eccentric) were separated by a 5 min rest interval and
a rest of 30 s was allowed between speeds. The
number of maximal muscle actions and the rest-
period durations were chosen to minimise muscu-
loskeletal fatigue, which is unlikely to occur with
only two reciprocal muscle actions at two speeds
(1.04 and 3.14 rad  s71) and a 30-s rest between
Downloaded by [Syracuse University Library] at 14:27 27 April 2013
reciprocal muscle actions and speeds and 5-min rest
between testing modes (concentric/concentric and
eccentric/eccentric).
Both for concentric/concentric and eccentric/
eccentric cycles, participants were encouraged to
push/resist as hard and as fast as possible and to
complete the full range of motion. Participants were
told to abort the test if they felt any discomfort or
pain. During the test, all participants were given
visual feedback from the system monitor. They were
also verbally encouraged by the investigator to give
their maximal effort, and the instructions were
standardised by using key words such as ‘‘resist’’,
‘‘push/pull’’ and ‘‘hard and fast as possible’’.
Measures
For the isokinetic gravity-corrected measures peak
torque, angle of peak torque and external work, the
mean of the two trials at each speed through the
testing sessions was used for subsequent statistical
analysis. In addition, Sole, Hamrén, Milosavljevic,
Nicholson, and Sullivan, (2007) reported better
reproducibility when they used the mean value
from three trials rather than the single highest value
for concentric and eccentric peak torque. In each
trial, peak torque and angle of peak torque were
reported as the maximum eccentric torque value and
corresponding joint angle. Total work was calculated
as the area under the eccentric angle-torque curve
(torque 6 distance). The speed throughout each
repetition was analysed and it was also verified that,
at the greater angular velocity, peak torque and angle
of peak torque was developed during the constant
speed period.
Three H/Q strength imbalance ratios were calcu-
lated using peak torque values: ‘‘conventional H/Q
ratio’’, ‘‘functional or dynamic H/Q ratio’’ and ‘‘co-
contraction H/Q ratio’’. The conventional H/Q ratio
was calculated by dividing the concentric hamstrings
Stretching on hamstring strength profile 835
peak torque by the concentric quadriceps peak
torque (H/QCONV). The functional H/Q ratio was
defined as peak eccentric hamstrings torque divided
by peak concentric quadriceps torque (H/QFUNC).
Finally, the co-contraction H/Q ratio was calculated
by dividing eccentric hamstrings torque by con-
centric quadriceps torque at the same joint angle
where the concentric quadriceps peak torque was
generated for both of these actions (H/QC-C). The
H/QC-C ratio is more functionally relevant in terms of
co-contraction and dynamic knee stability than H/
QCONV and H/QFUNC because it demonstrates
whether hamstrings eccentric torque is sufficient to
counter the anterior shear forces induced at the joint
angle where the concentric quadriceps peak torque
occurs. Despite the H/QC-C ratio being more useful
for clinical purposes, the H/QCONV and H/QFUNC
ratios were also calculated to contrast the findings of
the current study with the only two other studies that
have analysed the acute effect of pre-exercise
stretching on unilateral H/Q strength imbalance
ratios (Costa et al., 2009a, 2009b).
Statistical analysis
The distribution of raw data sets was checked using
the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test and demonstrated that
all data had a normal distribution (P 4 0.05). Recent
research studies have consistently reported no sex-
related differences in relation to the same stretching
treatment on isokinetic peak torque values (Behm,
Bradbury, Haynes, Odre, Leonard, & Paddock,
2006; Cramer, Beck, et al., 2007; Marek et al.,
2005) so men’s and women’s data were not analysed
separately. Descriptive statistics including means and
standard deviations were calculated for each
measure.
Mean effects of stretching (static and dynamic)
and their 90% confidence limits were estimated
using a spreadsheet designed by Hopkins (2007) via
the unequal-variances t statistic computed for change
scores between paired sessions (control vs static;
control vs dynamic; static vs dynamic) for each
variable. Alpha was P 5 0.05. Each participant’s
change score was expressed as a percentage of
baseline score via analysis of log-transformed values,
to reduce bias arising from non-uniformity of error.
Errors of measurement and individual responses
expressed as coefficients of variation were also
estimated. In addition, the analysis determines the
chances that the true effects are substantial or trivial
when a value for the smallest worthwhile change is
entered.
Coefficients of variation (CV) determined the
smallest substantial/worthwhile change for each of
the variables. As identified for eccentric knee flexion
isokinetic muscle actions (Maffiuletti, Bizzini,
 836 F. Ayala et al.

Desbrosses, Babault, & Munzinge, 2007), peak
torque has a reported CV of 6.4%, whereas angle
of peak torque has a CV of 18.1% and total work a
CV of 5.7%. The CV data previously reported for H/
QCONV and H/QFUNC are 5.4% and 6.3% respec-
tively (Impellizzeri, Bizzini, Rampinini, Cereda, &
Maffiulet, 2008). To the authors’ knowledge, no
studies have analysed the absolute reliability of the
H/QC-C, so we chose 0.20 standardised units (that is
a fraction of the between-participants standard
deviation at baseline) as the smallest worthwhile
change (Cohen, 1998). The default of 0.20 gives
chances that the true effect is at least small (Hopkins,
2002).
The qualitative descriptors proposed by Hopkins
(2002) were used to interpret the probabilities that
Downloaded by [Syracuse University Library] at 14:27 27 April 2013
QCON, H/QFUNC and H/QC-C ratios separately for
each experimental session.
As presented in Table III, there were no main
effects in eccentric knee flexion peak torque, angle of
peak torque and total work (P 4 0.05; trivial effect
with a probability of 75–95%; d 5 0.4) between
paired treatments. The lowest percentage changes
were reported for the peak torque measures (0.5–
2.6%) whereas the angle of peak torque measures
showed the highest (0.7–11.5%). In addition, the
statistical analysis for H/QCON, H/QFUNC and H/QC-
C ratios revealed a possible-likely trivial effect
between paired treatments.
Discussion

the true affects are harmful, trivial or beneficial:
51%, almost certainly not; 1–4%, very unlikely; 5–
24%, unlikely or probably not; 25–74%, possibly or
may be; 75–94%, likely or probably; 95–99%, very
likely; 49%, almost certainly.
Effect sizes, which are standardised values that
permit the determination of the magnitude of
differences between groups or experimental condi-
tions (Cohen, 1988), were also calculated for each of
the variables using the method previously described
by Cohen (1988). Cohen (1988) assigned descriptors
to the effect sizes (d) such that effect sizes less than
0.4 represented a small magnitude of change while
0.41–0.7 and greater than 0.7 represented moderate
and large magnitudes of change, respectively.
Results
Table I shows the mean and standard deviation for
eccentric knee flexion peak torque, angle of peak
torque and total work values among experimental
sessions. Likewise, Table II reports the data for H/
The primary findings of this study were that static
and dynamic lower-limb stretching exercises with an
isolated muscle stretch duration of 2630 s (static) or
2615 rhythmic movements (dynamic) had no
stretching-related impairment on eccentric strength
of the hamstrings. This conclusion is because we
found no stretching-induced changes in isokinetic
angle-torque curve characteristics expressed through
eccentric peak torque, angle of peak toque and total
work values. Therefore, the findings of the current
study do not support recent claims (Shrier, 1999;
Weldon & Hill, 2003) which have suggested that an
acute bout of stretching as part of a warm-up
procedure may increase the relative risk of injury
because it induces a reduction in eccentric strength
and alters absorption and release tensile energy
capacity of the muscle-tendon unit when stretched.
Although the current study is the first that has
determined the acute effect of static and dynamic
stretching on eccentric strength for the hamstrings,
our results are consistent with the only two previous
studies (to our knowledge) that have examined the

Table II. Mean + standard deviation values for conventional H/Q

Table I. Mean + standard deviation values for peak torque (PT), ratio (H/QCONV), functional or dynamic H/Q ratio (H/QFUNC)
angle of peak torque (APT) and total work (TW) at 1.04 rad  s71 and co-contraction H/Q ratio (H/QC-C) at 1.04 and 3.14 rad  s71
and 3.14 rad  s71 during eccentric knee flexion movements among among experimental sessions.
experimental sessions.
Static Dynamic
Static Dynamic No-stretching stretching stretching
No-stretching stretching stretching
1
H/QCONV
PT (Nm) 71.04 rad  s71 0.62 + 0.13 0.60 + 0.12 0.62 + 0.13
71.04 rad  s71 82.4 + 20.1 82.4 + 19.7 84.7 + 21.2 73.14 rad  s71 0.72 + 0.16 0.72 + 0.16 0.73 + 0.16
73.14 rad  s71 80.7 + 19.2 78.6 + 18.7 79.8 + 19.1 1
H/QFUNC
APT (8) 71.04 rad  s71 0.70 + 0.16 0.69 + 0.15 0.72 + 0.16
71.04 rad  s71 36.6 + 6.3 35.1 + 5.9 31.9 + 5.7 73.14 rad  s71 0.89 + 0.21 0.88 + 0.21 0.91 + 0.22
73.14 rad  s71 41.5 + 6.9 41.3 + 6.4 39.4 + 6.1 1
H/QC-C
TW (J)1 71.04 rad  s71 0.58 + 0.14 0.58 + 0.14 0.63 + 0.16
71.04 rad  s71 92.0 + 22.1 94.4 + 23.2 94.5 + 22.7 73.14 rad  s71 0.73 + 0.18 0.67 + 0.16 0.73 + 0.17
73.14 rad  s71 83.5 + 20.1 82.9 + 19.8 87.0 + 20.3
1 1
: main effect for speed (P 5 0.05). : main effect for speed (P 5 0.05).
 Stretching on hamstring strength profile 837

Table III. Percentage change in measures (mean + 90% CL) and likelihood (%) of being positive/ trivial / negative between paired
experimental sessions.

Control vs Static Control vs Dynamic Static vs Dynamic

PT
71.04 rad  s71 0.8 (73.8–5.6) 3 / 96 / 1 2.6 (71.6–7.0) 8 / 92 / 0 1.8 (72.5–6.3) 5 / 95 / 0
73.14 rad  s71 71.8 (77.9–4.7) 2 / 85 / 13 70.5 (75.3–4.5) 1 / 96 / 3 1.3 (73.8–6.7) 6 / 93 / 1
APT
71.04 rad  s71 72.0 (714.7–12.5) 1 / 94 / 4 711.5 (724.1–3.0) 0 / 68 / 31 0.7 (723.8–7.0) 1 / 73 / 26
73.14 rad  s71 2.7 (79.2–16.2) 3 / 96 / 1 73.7 (717.0–11.7) 1 / 91 / 8 76.3 (716.5–5.1) 0 / 93 / 7
TW
71.04 rad  s71 3.9 (72.3–10.5) 32 / 68 / 1 3.2 (73.4–10.4) 28 / 71 / 2 70.6 (77.1–6.3) 7 / 82 / 11
73.14 rad  s71 70.4 (77.2–6.9) 8 / 81 / 11 4.4 (72.4–11.6) 38 / 61 / 1 4.8 (71.8–11.8) 41 / 58 / 1
H/QCONV
71.04 rad  s71 73.3 (79.0–2.7) 1 / 69 / 30 71.3 (79.7–8.0) 11/ 66 / 23 2.1 (77.6–12.7) 29 / 60 / 11
73.14 rad  s71 0.3 (76.9–8.0) 14 / 74 / 11 1.3 (77.1–11.2) 25 / 62 / 13 1.0(76.3–8.9) 18 / 73 / 9
H/QFUNC
71.04 rad  s71 71.7 (78.5–5.6) 4 / 81 / 15 2.3 (75.7–11.0) 22 / 74 / 5 4.1 (74.7–13.7) 35 / 62 / 3
73.14 rad  s71 0.2 (78.9–10.0) 15 / 72 / 13 3.2 (76.1–13.4) 29 / 66 / 5 2.9 (73.7. 10.1) 20 / 79 / 1
Downloaded by [Syracuse University Library] at 14:27 27 April 2013

H/QC7C
71.04 rad  s71 0.8 (78.6–11.0) 18 / 70 / 12 4.7 (75.5–16.1) 40 / 55 / 4 3.9 (77.0–16.2) 37 / 56 / 7
73.14 rad  s71 710 (722.8–4.9) 2 / 64 / 34 1.4 (712.1–17.1) 17 / 73 / 10 12.7 (71.4–28.8) 52 / 48 / 1

CL: confidence limits; PT: peak torque; APT: angle of peak torque; TW: total work; H/QCONV: conventional H/Q ratio; H/QFUNC:
functional or dynamic H/Q ratio; H/QC-C: co-contraction H/Q ratio.

acute effects of static stretching on the eccentric
strength characteristics for the quadriceps, which
reported no stretching-induced changes in eccentric
peak torque and the joint angle of peak torque
(Cramer, Housh, Coburn, Beck, & Johnson, 2006;
Cramer, Housh, et al., 2007).
Although mechanisms responsible for the lack of
any static stretching-induced changes on the ec-
centric strength are not known, a possible reason
could be based on the hypothesis proposed by
Wilson, Murphy, and Pryor (1994). They suggested
that musculotendinous stiffness is related to iso-
metric and concentric muscle performance and that
there is no relationship between muscle-tendon unit
stiffness and eccentric force production. This theory
has been reinforced by a series of studies carried out
by Cramer and co-workers (Cramer et al., 2004,
2006; Cramer, Beck, et al., 2007; Cramer, Housh,
et al., 2007), and McHugh and Nesse (2008), which
suggested that the effects of static stretching are
mode and joint angle-specific. That is, static
stretching has no effect on eccentric muscle actions
(Cramer et al., 2006; Cramer, Housh, et al., 2007),
although it induces deficits in: (a) isometric muscle
actions at the shortest but not longest muscle lengths
(Herda, Cramer, Ryanm, McHugh, & Stout, 2008;
McHugh & Nesse, 2008); as well as (b) concentric
muscle actions at longest but not shortest muscle
lengths (Cramer, Beck, et al., 2007).
We could not compare the lack of dynamic
stretching-induced changes on eccentric strength
results from this study with others because to our
knowledge, this study is the first to have addressed
this issue. In addition, there appear to be no available
studies examining the acute effects of active dynamic
stretching on muscle-tendon unit viscoelastic prop-
erties, therefore the exact mechanism by which
dynamic stretching has no effect on the length-
tension relationship is still unknown.
The results of the current study showed no static
and dynamic stretching-related changes in H/
QCONV, H/QFUNC and H/QC-C ratios at 1.04 or
3.14 rad  s71. These findings suggest that static and
dynamic lower-limb stretching routines do not alter
the relative risk of hamstring strains by reducing the
H/QCONV, H/QFUNC and H/QC-C ratios. Our find-
ings do not support the results reported by Costa
et al. (2009a), who reported that a bout of ham-
strings and calf static stretching resulted in a
significant reduction of 2–9% in the H/QCONV at
1.04, 3.14 and 5.23 rad  s71 because the hamstrings
peak torque was reduced in contrast with quadriceps
peak torque, which remained unaltered. A possible
explanation is that Costa et al. (2009a) stretched only
hamstrings and calf muscles using an extensive
overall stretch duration (480 s and 120 s for ham-
strings and calf respectively), while the current study
stretched the major muscle groups of the lower limb
(psoas, quadriceps, hamstrings, gluteus and adduc-
tors) using an overall stretch duration of 60 s per
muscle group, which is more representative of a
typical warm-up used by athletes and recreationally
active people to prepare for exercise or competition
(Young & Behm, 2002). Additionally testing in this
 838 F. Ayala et al.
study occurred in a seated position with the hip
flexed at 858, which is not representative of hip joint
angle during most athletic activities, especially
during sprinting where hamstring strain is most
likely to occur. Therefore the current study is the first
that has used a prone body testing position to analyse
the acute effects of stretching on the eccentric length-
tension relationship for the hamstrings and H/
QCONV, H/QFUNC and H/QC-C ratios.
Although the current study is the first that has
examined the acute effects of short and sport
contextualised static and dynamic pre-exercise lower
limb stretching routine with consistent stretch
measures on the hamstrings eccentric strength and
on reciprocal H/Q strength ratios in active adults,
some limitations should be noted. The first is that
Downloaded by [Syracuse University Library] at 14:27 27 April 2013
this study did not directly evaluate changes in the
range of motion or changes in resistance and
tolerance to stretch attributable to the experimental
stretching treatments. Therefore it is not known if
the stretching interventions were actually effective in
increasing flexibility or in decreasing muscle stiff-
ness, although previous studies that have used similar
stretching doses have reported increases in flexibility
attributable to an increase in stretching tolerance
without decreases muscle stiffness (Magnusson,
Aagaard, & Nielson, 2000; McNair, Dombroski,
Hewson, & Stanley, 2000). Another possible limita-
tion of the current study is the population used.
Although this investigation used 49 participants (25
men and 24 women), much higher than previous
studies (Cramer et al., 2004, 2006; Cramer, Beck,
et al., 2007; Cramer, Housh, et al., 2007; Herda
et al., 2008; McHugh & Nesse, 2008), the partici-
pants were homogenous based on age and physical
status, which could limit the external validity of the
results.
Conclusion
The results of the present study indicate that sports
contextualised pre-exercise static and dynamic low-
er-limb stretching routines have no adverse effects on
hamstring eccentric strength and on unilateral
strength ratios of the knee. Although it is well
established that stretching can increase joint range
of motion, our findings do not support the sugges-
tion that dynamic and static stretching reduce two
primary risk factors (eccentric strength and muscle
imbalance) for muscle injury.
Acknowledgments
This publication was made possible by the Program
of Human Resources Formation for Science and
Technology grant number 06862/FPI/2007 from
the Seneca Foundation under PCTRM 2007–2010
programme, with INFO and FEDER funding up to
80%.
References
Agel, J., Arendt, E. A., & Bershadsky, B. (2005). Anterior cruciate
ligament injury in National Collegiate Athletic Association
basketball and soccer: A 13-year review. American Journal of
Sports Medicine, 33(4), 524–530.
Alter, M. J. (1997). Sports stretch. Champaign IL: Human Kinetics.
Bahr, R., & Krosshaug, T. (2005). Understanding the injury
mechanisms: A key component to prevent injuries in sport.
British Journal of Sports Medicine, 39, 324–329.
Behm, D. G., Bradbury, E. E., Haynes, A. T., Odre, J. N.,
Leonard, A. M., & Paddock, N. (2006). Flexibility is not
related to stretch-induced deficits in force or power. Journal of
Sports Science and Medicine, 5, 33–42.
Bell, D. R., Myrick, M. P., Blackburn, J. T., Shultz, S. J.,
Guskiewicz, K. M., & Padua, D. A. (2009). The effect of
menstrual-cycle phase on hamstring extensibility and muscle
stiffness. Journal of Sport Rehabilitation, 18, 553–563.
Beynnon, B. D., Johnson, R. J., Abate, J. A., Fleming, B. C., &
Nichols, C. E. (2005). Treatment of anterior cruciate ligament
injuries, part 1. American Journal of Sports Medicine, 33, 1579–
1602.
Bompa, T. O. (2000). Periodization training for sports (Plans to
achieve the maximum performance in 35 sports). Barcelona:
Editorial Paidotribo.
Brockett, C. L., Morgan, D. L., & Proske, U. (2004). Predicting
hamstring strain injury in elite athletes. Medicine and Science in
Sports and Exercise, 36(3), 379–387.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences
(2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Costa, P. B., Ryan, E. D., Herda, T. J., DeFreitas, J. M., Beck, T.
W., & Cramer, J. T. (2009a). Effects of stretching on peak
torque and the H:Q ratio. International Journal of Sports
Medicine, 30, 60–65.
Costa, P. B., Ryan, E. D., Herda, T. J., Defreitas, J. M., Beck, T.
W., & Cramer, J. T. (2009b). Effects of static stretching on the
hamstrings-to-quadriceps ratio and electromyographic ampli-
tude in men. Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness, 49,
401–409.
Cramer, J. T., Beck, T. W., Housh, T. J., Massey, L. L., Marek, S.
M., Danglemeier, S., . . . Egan, A. (2007). Acute effects of static
stretching on characteristics of the isokinetic angle–torque
relationship, surface electromyography, and mechanomyogra-
phy. Journal of Sports Sciences, 25(6), 687–698.
Cramer, J. T., Housh, T. J., Coburn, J. W., Beck, T. W., &
Johnson, G. O. (2006). Acute effects of static stretching on
maximal eccentric torque production in women. Journal of
Strength and Conditioning Research, 20(2), 354–358.
Cramer, J. T., Housh, T. J., Johnson, G. O., Millar, J. M.,
Coburn, J. W., & Beck, T. W. (2004). Acute effects of static
stretching on peak torque in women. Journal of Strength and
Conditioning Research, 18(2), 236–241.
Cramer, J. T., Housh, T. J., Johnson, G. O., Weir, J. P., Beck, T.
W., & Coburn, J. W. (2007). An acute bout of static stretching
does not affect maximal eccentric isokinetic peak torque, the
joint angle at peak torque, mean power, electromyography, or
mechanomyography. Journal of Orthopaedic and Sports Physical
Therapy, 37(3), 130–139.
Croisier, J. L. (2004). Factors associated with recurrent hamstring
injuries. Sports Medicine, 34, 681–695.
Croisier, J. L., Forthomme, B., Namurois, M. H., Vanderthom-
men, M., & Crielaard, J. M. (2002). Hamstring muscle strain
recurrence and strength performance disorders. American
Journal of Sports Medicine, 30(2), 199–203.

Drouin, J. M., Valovich, T. C., Shultz, S. J., Gansneder, B. M., &
Perrin, D. H. (2004). Reliability and validity of the Biodex System
3 Pro Isokinetic Dynamometer velocity, torque and position
measurements. European Journal of Applied Physiology, 91, 22–29.
Eiling, E., Bryant, A. L., Petersen, W., Murphy, A., & Hohmann
E. (2007). Effects of menstrual-cycle hormone fluctuations on
musculotendinous stiffness and knee joint laxity. Knee Surgery
Sports Traumatology Arthroscopy, 15, 126–132.
Gleim, G. W., & McHugh, M. P. (1997). Flexibility and its effects
on sports injury and performance. Sports Medicine, 24, 289–299.
Hedrick, A. (2000). Dynamic flexibility training. Strength and
Conditioning Journal, 22, 33–38.
Herda, T. J., Cramer, J. T., Ryanm, E. D., McHugh, M. P., &
Stout, J. R. (2008). Acute effects of static versus dynamic
stretching on isometric peak torque, electromyography, and
mechanomyography of the biceps femoris muscle. Journal of
Strength and Conditioning Research, 22(3), 809–817.
Hootman, J. M., Dick, R., & Agel, J. (2007). Epidemiology of
collegiate injuries for 15 sports: Summary and recommenda-
tions for injury prevention initiatives. Journal of Athletic
Downloaded by [Syracuse University Library] at 14:27 27 April 2013
Training, 42(2), 311–319.
Hopkins, W. G. (2002). Probabilities of clinical or practical
significance. Sportscience, 6. Retrieved from http://www.sports-
ci.org/jour/0201/wghprob.htm.
Hopkins, W. G. (2007). A spreadsheet for deriving a confidence
interval, mechanistic inference and clinical inference from a P
value. Sportscience, 11, 16–20.
Houweling, T. A. W., Head, A., & Hamzeh, M. A. (2009). Validity
of isokinetic testing for previous hamstring injury detection in
soccer players. Isokinetic Exercise Science, 17, 213–220.
Impellizzeri, F. M., Bizzini, M., Rampinini, E., Cereda, F., &
Maffiulet, N. A. (2008). Reliability of isokinetic strength imbalance
ratios measured using the Cybex NORM dynamometer. Clinical
Physiology and Functional Imaging, 28(2), 113–119.
Kellis, E., Kellis, S., Gerodimos, V., & Manou, V. (1999). Reliability
of isokinetic concentric and eccentric strength in circumpubertal
soccer players. Pediatric Exercise Science, 11, 218–228.
Kubo, K., Kanehisa, H., & Fukinaga, T. (2002). Effects of
resistance and stretching training programmes on the viscoe-
lastic properties of human tendon structures in vivo. Journal of
Physiology, 38, 219–226.
Maffiuletti, N. A., Bizzini, M., Desbrosses, K., Babault, N., &
Munzinge, U. (2007). Reliability of knee extension and flexion
measurements using the Con-Trex isokinetic dynamometer.
Clinical Physiology and Functional Imaging, 27(6), 346–353.
Magnusson, S. P., Aagaard, P., & Nielson, J. J. (2000). Passive energy
return after repeated stretches of the hamstring muscle-tendon
unit. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 32(6), 1160–1164.
Manoel, M., Harris-Love, M., Danoff, J., & Miller, T. (2008).
Acute effects of static, dynamic, and proprioceptive neuromus-
cular facilitation stretching on muscle power in women. Journal
of Strength and Conditioning Research, 22, 1528–1534.
Marek, S. M., Cramer, J. T., Fincher, A. L., Massey, L. L.,
Dangelmaier, S. M., Purkayastha, S.,. . . Culbertson, J. Y.
(2005). Acute effects of static and proprioceptive neuromus-
cular facilitation stretching on muscle strength and power
output. Journal of Athletic Training, 40(2), 94–103.
McHugh, M. P., & Nesse, M. (2008). Effect of stretching on
strength loss and pain after eccentric exercise. Medicine and
Science in Sports and Exercise, 40, 566–573.
McHugh, M. P., & Cosgrave, C. H. (2010). To stretch or not to
stretch: The role of stretching in injury prevention and
performance. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in
Sports, 20, 169–181.
McNair, P. J., Dombroski, E. W., Hewson, D. J., & Stanley, S. N.
(2000). Stretching at the ankle joint: Viscoelastic responses to
holds and continuous passive motion. Medicine and Science in
Sports and Exercise, 33(3), 354–358.
Stretching on hamstring strength profile 839
Ogura, Y., Miyahara, Y., Naito, H., Katamoto, S., & Auki, J.
(2007). Duration of static stretching influences muscle force
production in hamstring muscles. Journal of Strength and
Conditioning Research, 21(3), 788–792.
Romani, W., Patrie, J., Curl, L. A., & Flaws, T. (2003). The
correlations between estradiol, estrone, estriol, progesterone and
sex hormone binding globulin and anterior cruciate ligament
stiffness in healthy active females. Journal of Women’s Health, 12,
287–292.
Shellock, F. G., & Prentice, W. E. (1985). Warming-up and
stretching for improved physical performance and prevention of
sports-related injuries. Sports Medicine, 2, 267–278.
Sherry, M. A., & Best, T. M. (2004). A comparison of 2
rehabilitation programs in the treatment of acute hamstring
strains. Journal of Orthopaedics and Sports Physical Therapy,
34(3), 116–125.
Shrier, I. (1999). Stretching before exercise does not reduce the risk
of local muscle injury: A critical review of the clinical and basic
science literature. Clinical Journal of Sport Medicine, 9, 221–227.
Sole, G., Hamrén, J., Milosavljevic, S., Nicholson, H., & Sullivan, J.
(2007). Test-retest reliability of isokinetic knee extension and
flexion. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 88, 626–631.
Solomorrow, M., Baratta, R., & D’Ambrosia, R. (1989). The role of
hamstrings in the rehabilitation of the anterior cruciate ligament-
deficient knee in athletes. Sports Medicine, 7, 42–48.
Taylor, N., Sanders, R., Howick, E., & Stanley, S. (1991). Static
and dynamic assessment of the Biodex dynamometer. European
Journal of Applied Physiology and Occupational Physiology, 62(3),
180–188.
Thacker, S. B. J., Gilchrist, J., Stroup, C. D., & Kimsey, J. R.
(2004). The impact of stretching on sports injury risk: A
systematic review of the literature. Medicine and Science in Sports
and Exercise, 36(3), 371–378.
Weldon, S. M., & Hill, R. H. (2003). The efficacy of stretching for
prevention of exercise-related injury: A systematic review of the
literature. Manual Therapy, 8, 141–150.
Wilson, G. J., Murphy, A. J., & Pryor, J. F. (1994). Musculotendinous
stiffness: Its relationship to eccentric, isometric and concentric
performance. Journal of Applied Physiology, 76, 2714–2719.
Witvrouw, E., Mahieu, N., Danneels, L., & McNair, P. (2004).
Stretching and injury prevention, an obscure relationship.
Sports Medicine, 34(7), 443–449.
Woods, K., Bishop, P., & Jones, E. (2007). Warm-up and
stretching in the prevention of muscular injury. Sports Medicine,
37, 1089–1099.
Worrell, T. W., Denegar, C. R., Armstrong, S. L., & Perrin, D. H.
(1990). Effect of body position on hamstring muscle group
average torque. Journal of Orthopaedic and Sports Physical
Therapy, 11(10), 449–452.
Worrell, T. W., & Perrin, D. H. (1992). Hamstring muscle injury:
The influence of strength, flexibility warm-up and fatigue.
Journal of Orthopaedic and Sports Physical Therapy, 16, 12–18.
Worrell, T. W., Perrin, D. H., & Denegar, C. R. (1989). The
influence of hip position on quadriceps and hamstring peak
torque and reciprocal muscle group ratio values. Journal of
Orthopaedic and Sports Physical Therapy, 11(3), 104–107.
Young, W. B., & Behm, D. G. (2002). Should static stretching be
used during a warm-up for strength and power activities?
Strength and Conditioning Journal, 24, 33–37.
Zakas, A., Doganis, G., Galazoulas, C., & Vamvakoudis, E.
(2006). Acute effects of static stretching duration on isokinetic
peak torque in pubescent soccer players. Pediatric Exercise
Science, 18(2), 252–261.
Zakas, A., Galazoulas, C., Zakas, N., Vamvakoudis, E., & Vergou,
A. (2005). The effect of stretching duration on flexibility during
warming up in adolescent soccer players. Physical Training.
Retrieved from http://www.ejmas.com/pt/2005pt/ptart_Zakas_0
905.html.