Comparação de dois protocolos de alongamento para amplitude de movimento e força dinâmica

Abstract

Introduction: Although there is evidence of the acute effect of static stretching on dynamic force, it is not known whether the total volume of the protocol is more important than the individual time spent in each series. Objective: To evaluate the effect of two different static stretching routines with the same total volume on passive range of motion (ROM), muscle activation (EMGRMS and EMGFM) and the performance resistance force (10-RM). Methods: Fourteen male subjects underwent three different randomized procedures: a) control condition (CC); b) fractionated static stretching (SS-30 s), and c) continuous static stretching (SS-2 min.). To measure the ROM, the digital photogrammetry method was used, and the force performance and myoelectric activation were measured by the 10-RM test in the unilateral leg press exercise and by the electromyographic signal of the vastus lateralis (VL), respectively. Results: There was significant difference in the ROM in the comparison between SS-2 min. vs. CC (P=0.006) and SS-30 s vs. CC (P=0.01). Both stretching conditions promoted significant acute increases in ROM in the comparisons prior to and immediately after (P=0.0001, 144.2±10.2 vs. 152.2±10.5 for SS-30 s and 147.4±11.9 vs. 155.1±9.9 for SS-2 min.), but with no difference between procedures. There was no significant difference for any other variables tested. Conclusion: Continuous and fractionated static stretching routines with less volume can be used to acutely increase the ROM levels without causing damage to muscle strength or activation levels. Level of Evidence II; II; Lesser quality RCT.