Recommendations on Stretching for Athletes: Academic Consensus Statement

Paper: Warneke K, Thomas E, Blazevich AJ, et al. Practical recommendations on stretching exercise: A Delphi consensus statement of international research experts. J Sport Health Sci 2025;xxx:101067.

Stretching is a widely practiced component of athletic training, often integrated into warm-up, cool-down, and rehabilitation routines to enhance flexibility, prevent injuries, and support recovery. However, the scientific literature presents conflicting evidence regarding its efficacy, compounded by inconsistent definitions and methodologies across studies. To address this, a Delphi consensus study published in the Journal of Sport and Health Science (2025), led by Konstantin Warneke and Jan Wilke, convened 20 international experts from 12 countries to develop evidence-based recommendations. Initiated in April 2023 and submitted in February 2025, this rigorous process utilized a structured Delphi method to synthesize existing research and provide practical guidance for athletes and sportsmen.

Consensus Findings on Stretching Effects

The expert panel, comprising professionals with backgrounds in physiotherapy, sports science, and exercise physiology, achieved consensus on several aspects of stretching. Chronic and acute stretching were found to improve range of motion (ROM), a critical factor for athletic performance requiring joint flexibility. Additionally, stretching reduces muscle stiffness, though this effect may not always be advantageous, particularly in sports where muscle tension contributes to performance. The panel also noted potential chronic benefits for vascular health from static stretching, though further research is needed to substantiate this claim. Conversely, the consensus rejected the notion that stretching significantly enhances muscle growth, serves as a comprehensive injury prevention strategy, improves posture, or acutely improves post-exercise recovery. These findings challenge common assumptions and underscore the need for a balanced training approach.

The study emphasizes that stretching’s effectiveness is moderated by factors such as typology (static vs. dynamic), duration, intensity, and timing. For instance, pre-exercise stretching may enhance mobility, but excessive application could impair power output. This variability highlights the importance of context-specific application, particularly in rehabilitation where stretching restores muscle extensibility and ROM post-injury. However, its limited impact on post-exercise recovery suggests that alternative methods should be considered for recovery management. 

Detailed Analysis of Recommendations

Section 3.2 of the consensus statement provides specific recommendations based on the panel’s deliberations. The following points summarize the discussion for each point, reflecting the evidence and additional remarks from the document:

3.2.1 Acute Range of Motion (ROM)

• Systematic reviews and meta-analyses clearly show short-term stretching improves ROM.

• However, no stretching technique shows superiority; alternatives like foam rolling, cycling, jogging, eccentric resistance training, heat, or vibration also acutely increase ROM.

• Not all joints respond equally; some muscles/joints may require longer stretching durations or may not show significant improvements.

• Stretching is not essential but is a viable option for acute ROM enhancement.

3.2.2 Chronic Range of Motion

• Long-term stretching improves flexibility consistently across studies.

• Static and PNF stretching generally produce larger ROM gains than dynamic stretching.

• Other interventions like full-range resistance training, especially emphasizing eccentric movements, and foam rolling, have comparable effects.

• No conclusive evidence favoring high vs. low intensity; choice can be based on individual preference.

• ROM improvements are linked to reduced mortality and morbidity in middle-aged adults.

3.2.3 Acute Strength Performance

• Prolonged static stretching (>60 seconds per muscle) before maximal or explosive activities can acutely reduce muscle force and performance.

• Short-duration static or dynamic stretching within warm-ups generally do not impair strength or power.

• Alternatives like foam rolling and jogging can also avoid strength impairments.

• Strength and performance are multifaceted; the evidence highlights the need for careful planning in warm-up routines involving stretching.

3.2.4 Chronic Strength Performance

• While stretching alone is not effective as a primary strength-building intervention, some evidence suggests chronic high-volume stretching can induce small strength gains.

• Resistance training remains far more effective and time-efficient.

• Stretching might offer benefits for populations unable or unwilling to perform resistance training (e.g., rehabilitation or elderly).

• The role of stretching intensity in strength outcomes is under-researched.

3.2.5 Muscle Hypertrophy

• Chronic static stretching, especially with long durations and high volume, may produce small increases in muscle size.

• Stretching is not recommended as a primary hypertrophy strategy.

• Effects may be relevant for sedentary individuals or those who cannot perform resistance exercise.

• More research on stretch intensity and mechanistic aspects of hypertrophy is needed.

3.2.6 Acute Stiffness

• Stretching can acutely decrease muscle-tendon stiffness, but this usually requires longer durations (>4 minutes per muscle).

• Shorter stretches and most other techniques lack consistent evidence for reducing stiffness acutely.

• Reduced stiffness may not always be positive; it could impair tendon energy storage and the stretch-shortening cycle, potentially harming performance.

• Most studies emphasize skeletal muscle and tendons; fascia’s role is largely unexplored.

3.2.7 Chronic Stiffness

• Evidence suggests chronic stretching reduces muscle stiffness, generally linked with improved flexibility.

• Tendon stiffness appears unaffected by chronic stretching; effects are mostly localized to muscle tissue.

• Stiffness reductions may have both positive and negative functional implications.

• Research on fascia and connective tissue adaptations remains scarce.

3.2.8 Injury Risk

• Acute stretching bouts have no demonstrated protective effect against injury.

• Chronic stretching’s role in injury prevention is inconclusive and generally unsupported by systematic reviews.

• Some evidence shows static stretching might reduce muscle injuries but may increase bone and joint injuries, suggesting trade-offs.

• Other interventions, such as strength, stability, and postural control exercises, show better injury prevention efficacy.

• The literature on stretching and injury is limited and heterogeneous; acute versus chronic stretching effects remain poorly differentiated.

3.2.9 Post-Exercise Recovery

• Stretching after exercise does not significantly reduce delayed-onset muscle soreness (DOMS) or improve recovery of range of motion or strength.

• Despite widespread use in cool-down routines, this practice is losing favor in updated exercise guidelines.

• Theories on mechanisms of DOMS shift focus from muscle damage to fascia involvement.

• Most evidence comes from exercise protocols that deliberately induce DOMS, which may not reflect “real-world” training conditions.

• Stretching’s psychological benefits exist, but objective recovery improvements lack solid backing.

3.2.10 Muscle Imbalance and Posture

• Stretching is commonly used clinically to address muscular imbalances and improve posture.

• Evidence supports strengthening of weak muscles for postural correction but finds isolated stretching ineffective.

• Combined strength and stretching programs show better results than stretching alone.

• There is some uncertainty whether higher stretching volumes or intensities might influence posture more effectively.

3.2.11 Acute Vascular System Effects

• Muscle stretching applies strain to blood vessels, with some studies reporting acute improvements in parameters like blood pressure, arterial stiffness, and heart rate variability.

• Evidence is limited and mostly from healthy young populations.

• Similar vascular benefits may be achieved by foam rolling or low-to-moderate intensity resistance training.

• Mechanisms behind these vascular effects (e.g., sympathetic-parasympathetic balance) are unclear and need further investigation.

3.2.12 Chronic Vascular System Effects

• Chronic stretching may beneficially affect arterial stiffness, endothelial function, and heart rate variability.

• Improvements tend to be localized to stretched regions (limbs/thorax).

• Some evidence suggests effects comparable in magnitude to those achieved by resistance and endurance training.

• Recommendations should be cautiously interpreted, especially for clinical populations—stretching is an alternative when more active exercise isn’t feasible.

• More comprehensive and uniform clinical data are needed for definitive conclusions. 

In a nutshell, while stretching clearly improves range of motion acutely and chronically, and may influence muscle stiffness and vascular health, its effects on strength, hypertrophy, injury prevention, recovery, and posture are less clear, often limited, or inconsistent. The evidence emphasizes context, dose, and the existence of alternative effective modalities.

<-- Back to Research Watch