Afonso · Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) 2021 · systematic review and meta-analysis · n=11 studies (452 participants)

Strength Training versus Stretching for Improving Range of Motion: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Cited 74 times in the scientific literature.

Level 1 - systematic review of randomized trials

Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

PubMed 33917036 · doi:10.3390/healthcare9040427 · record verified 2026-08-30

What was done

Authors systematically reviewed and meta-analyzed supervised randomized controlled trials comparing strength training directly against stretching interventions for range of motion (ROM) in humans. Searches were conducted across Cochrane Library, EBSCO, PubMed, Scielo, Scopus, and Web of Science through March 2021 without language or year limits. Subgroup analyses evaluated risk of bias, active versus passive ROM, and specific joint movements.

What was found

Eleven RCTs comprising 452 participants were included. Pooled results demonstrated no statistically significant difference between strength training and stretching on ROM (ES = -0.22; 95% CI = -0.55 to 0.12; p = 0.206). Subgroup analyses by risk of bias, active versus passive ROM, and specific joint actions also showed no between-protocol differences in ROM gains.

Why it matters

Strength training can serve as an effective alternative to stretching for increasing joint range of motion, potentially streamlining exercise programming by combining strength and flexibility development.

Limits

The total sample size was small across 11 studies (452 participants). The included trials demonstrated substantial heterogeneity in study design, exercise protocols, and subject populations.

Cited by