Abstract
When improving athletic performance in sports with high-speed strength demands such as soccer, basketball, or track and field, the most common training method might be resistance training and plyometrics. Since a link between strength capacity and speed strength exists and recently published literature suggested chronic stretching routines may enhance maximum strength and hypertrophy, this review was performed to explore potential benefits on athletic performance. Based on current literature, a beneficial effect of static stretching on jumping and sprinting performance was hypothesized. A systematic literature search was conducted using PubMed, Web of Science and Google scholar. In general, 14 studies revealed 29 effect sizes (ES) (20 for jumping, nine for sprinting). Subgroup analyses for jump performance were conducted for short- long- and no stretch shortening cycle trials. Qualitative evaluation was supplemented by performing a multilevel meta-analysis via R (Package: metafor). Significant positive results were documented in six out of 20 jump tests and in six out of nine sprint tests, while two studies reported negative adaptations. Quantitative data analyses indicated a positive but trivial magnitude of change on jumping performance (ES:0.16, p = 0.04), while all subgroup analyses did not support a positive effect (p = 0.09–0.44). No significant influence of static stretching on sprint performance was obtained (p = 0.08). Stretching does not seem to induce a sufficient stimulus to meaningfully enhance jumping and sprinting performance, which could possibly attributed to small weekly training volumes or lack of intensity.
1 Introduction
Due to its paramount importance in team sports as well as track and field, a vast amount of research was performed to ascertain training routines to improve jumping and sprinting performance (; ; ; Ramirez-Campillo et al., 2022). Indeed, authors described speed strength to be game-changing in soccer (Requena et al., 2014; ), basketball (; ; ), or handball (; Wagner et al., 2014), underlining the relevance of developing appropriate and effective training routines. In accordance with the literature, several training routines included plyometric exercises (; ), while other studies suggested maximal strength capacity to positively influence speed strength (; Wirth et al., 2016).
Accordingly, a high influence of lower body maximal strength in the squat was frequently reported. With r = 0.78, Wisloff et al. (Wisløff et al., 2004) reported a significant relationship between maximum strength in half squats and vertical jump performance in soccer players (Wisløff et al., 2004) while Warneke et al. (2022c) showed maximum strength in the deep squat and deadlift to be strongly correlated with vertical and horizontal jumping performance as well as linear and change of direction sprints. Therefore, it does not seem surprising that chronic resistance training routines were sufficient to meaningfully enhance speed strength performance in athletic populations (; ).
Even though resistance training can be considered safe and effective, it is necessary to supervise the training to avoid poor exercise technique and inappropriate training loading (; ). Therefore, developing facility and time independent, safe, and effective training alternatives seem to be beneficial (; Schwendinger and Pocecco, 2020). Interestingly, recently published articles suggest high intensity () or high volume () static stretching can induce muscle hypertrophy and maximal strength increases, that were similar to resistance training adaptations, if performed appropriately (Warneke et al., 2023b). These results are in accordance with earlier research, indicating potential performance increases in response to chronic stretching routines (Shrier, 2004; ). Since also suggested static stretching to be a possible alternative to heavy strength training programs, the question arises about the practical relevance when aiming to enhance athletic performance. No previous systematic reviews have explored the possibility to induce meaningful improvements in jumping height and sprinting speed. As a consequence, this systematic review with meta-analysis was conducted to investigate the possibility of using static stretching to enhance the listed parameters in healthy active participants. Based on the current literature showing stretch-induced strength and muscle size increases, it was hypothesized that static stretching could provide a sufficient stimulus to enhance jumping and sprinting performance.
2 Materials and methods
Adhering to the PRISMA Guidelines () (see Supplemental Material) a systematic literature search was conducted on the PubMed, Web of Science and Scopus databases, which was supplemented by the first 500 Google Scholar hits. The study did not match the study registration criteria of the PROSPERO database (i.e., health-related outcomes) as it investigated athletic performance outcomes. Therefore, the study protocol was not registered.
2.1 Eligibility criteria
After removing duplicates remaining study titles and abstract were screened using the following eligibility criteria. Studies were excluded if they 1) did not include a passive control group or 2) incorporated older participants (>65 years), patients or injured participants 3) investigated acute effects of stretching 4) did not perform static stretching. The cut-off to discriminate younger from old adults was set under consideration of the common World Health Organization (WHO) classification. Accordingly, adhering to the PICO (participant/patient, intervention, comparison, outcome) guidelines (), the search term was built considering the following inclusion criteria:
Participants: young and healthy participants.
Intervention: at least 2 weeks of static stretching interventions.
Comparison/control: controlled study design using a passive control (without receiving an intervention instruction within the study).
Outcome: any type of jumping or sprinting performance, including change of direction and linear sprint testing.
2.1 1 Literature search
The literature search was performed in March 2023 and updated in November 2024. Three authors (PF, GP and TS) independently reviewed the search results. The search was conducted using the following search term.
2.2 Study selection
After performing the independent systematic literature search, each study selected for inclusion was additionally reviewed considering the inclusion criteria by another author (KW), who extracted the data afterwards. The final excel sheets were independently double checked by the authors (GP, PF).
2.3 Risk of bias
Quality assessment was performed following the “PEDro scale” criteria (; ). The quality assessment was independently performed by two authors (PF, TS), and in the case of differing results, a third reviewer decided (KW). The risk of publication bias was assessed by visually inspecting funnel plots.
GRADE working group criteria () were applied to rate the certainty of evidence following categorizations of “very low” (effect estimate very uncertain), “low” (further research very likely changing the effect estimate), “moderate” (further research likely to change the effect estimate) or “high” (further research very unlikely to change the effect estimate). In accordance to the described criteria and the inclusion of (randomized) controlled trials, the quality of evidence was initially classified as high and adjusted afterwards based on possible study limitations (risk of bias). Attributes like inconsistency, uncertainty of directness, or imprecise data, reporting bias caused a downgrading, while strong evidence of association, evidence of a dose-response gradient and plausible confounders upgraded the certainty of evidence.
2.4 Statistical procedure
Data were extracted by PF and KW and double checked by GP. If no original values (means (M) and standard deviations (SD)) were provided in the full text, the corresponding authors were contacted. If no answer was received, values were imputed from graphics, if applicable. Otherwise, the study was not further considered for further calculation. Using collected M and SD from pre- and post-tests, changes were calculated, performing M(posttest)–M(pretest). Standard deviations were pooled as .
Accounting for dependency of effect size with multiple outcomes, a multilevel meta-analysis was performed to pool the standardized mean differences (SMD) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) plotting the stretching intervention versus the passive control condition. Furthermore, subgroup analyses were performed for jump performance, distinguishing between the short stretch shortening cycle (SSC) activities by including a variety of drop jumps, the long SSC with different countermovement jumps and jumps without any assumed SSC like the squat jump. Outcome heterogeneity is expressed using τ2 for inter- and intragroup heterogeneity and is plotted in the graphical ES illustration. Pooled effect sizes (ES) were interpreted as follows: 0≤ES < 0.2 trivial, 0.2≤ES < 0.5 small, 0.5≤ES < 0.8 moderate and ES ≥ 0.8 large (). All calculations were performed with R using the package metafor to account for outcome dependencies of multiple outcomes.
3 Results
The literature search resulted in 14 articles (Figure 1). The quality assessment is illustrated in Table 1, study characteristics are provided in Table 2.
FIGURE 1
TABLE 1
| Study | Parameter | Participants | Stretch intervention | Testing condition |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CMBJ | n = 42 | 6 weeks | Two JVC 9800 video cameras for height assessment, Ariel Performance Analyses System, 19 body landmarks for 3D software | |
| sport students | stretching of lower limbs | |||
| 3 groups: n = 14 | 3 times per week | |||
| SS, DS, CG | 2 sets with 6 exercises and | |||
| 10 s stretch | ||||
| Intensity | ||||
| maximum joint ROM without pain | ||||
| Single-leg CMJ | n = 30 | 9 weeks | Knee bent to approximately 90° | |
| Child female gymnasts | Quadriceps stretch | Hands akimbo throughout jump | ||
| 2 groups | 3 times per week | Extended body position at takeoff and landing | ||
| SG: n = 19 | One leg 3 × 30 s stretch and 30 s rest, other leg 90 s single static stretch | Jumping height was | ||
| CG: n = 11 | Intensity | determined from flight-time | ||
| One leg was intermittently and the other continuously stretched | 8 on 0–10 Wong-Baker FACES Pain Scale | using Optojump system | ||
| CMJ, DJ 30, DJ 60, DJ 90 | n = 50 | 10 weeks (40 sessions) | CMJ, DJ30, DJ60, DJ90 hands on hips no restrictions placed on countermovement or ground contact time calculation via force plate, Bertec 6090, Bertec Corporation | |
| men with variety of sporting backgrounds | of lower-body stretching | |||
| 4 groups | 4 days per week | |||
| Group p: n = 11 | duration of one stretch increases from | |||
| Group S: n = 11 | week 1 + 2: 20 s | |||
| Group PS: n = 14 | week 3 + 4: 30 s | |||
| Group C: n = 14 | week 5 + 6: 40 s | |||
| week 7 + 8: 50 s | ||||
| week 9 + 10: 60 s | ||||
| each stretch 3 repetitions | ||||
| 12 exercises | ||||
| PS Group | ||||
| same stretching protocol + two power training sessions per week | ||||
| Intensity | ||||
| stretches to mild discomfort | ||||
| SJ CMJ RJ | n = 25 men | 6 weeks knee extensors | CMJ and SJ: Best of 3 jumps (each) RJ: 6 consecutive jumps as high as possible with shortest possible ground contact time, first jump does not count, highest value out of the 5 jumps taken for RJ calculations calculated via Kistler force plate, Type 9285 A | |
| no athletes but sports background | Stretch | |||
| 2 groups | 3 times per week | |||
| SG, CG | 6 sets of 30s stretch and 60s rest between sets | |||
| Intensity | ||||
| maximum stretch for knee extensors but within the limit of pain | ||||
| Single-leg DJ (20-cm) | n = 40 men | 4 weeks (12 sessions) | 20-cm box single-leg drop jump on Jump mat system, 4Assist, hands crossed in front of the chest | |
| 3 groups | 3 times per week | |||
| HI-SS: n = 14 | 3 sets of 60 s stretch and 30 s rest using a stretching board | |||
| LI-SS:n = 13 | Intensity | |||
| CON: n = 13 | 11-point numerical scale was used (0 = none to 11 = very painful) | |||
| HI-SS at 6–7 | ||||
| LI-SS at 0–1 | ||||
| Single leg CMJ | n = 21 female volleyball player single leg intervention, the other leg used for control | 12 weeks (60 sessions) | one-leg CMJ Force platform Applied Measurements Ltd. WP800 arms akimbo and vertical jump with ankle and knee fully extended | |
| static stretching of plantar flexors | ||||
| 5 times per week | ||||
| 2 sets with 6 exercises | ||||
| week 1–3: 45 s | ||||
| week 4–6: 60 s | ||||
| week 6–12: 75 s | ||||
| Intensity 8–9 on | ||||
| Wong Baker FACES Pain Scale | ||||
| near point of discomfort | ||||
| Warneke et al. (2022d) | CMJ DJ (24-cm) SJ | n = 35 | 6 weeks | jumps performed on |
| healthy students from physical education programs | (daily stretch for 10 min Per leg/42 sessions) | Force plate AMTI, BP600900-4000 | ||
| 2 groups | stretching of the plantar flexors with Stretching Board | SJ initiated from squat position | ||
| IG: n = 17 | Intensity | after 2s hold without momentum | ||
| rPA: n = 18 | stretching pain of 7–8 out of 10 on a numeric pain scale | CMJ and SJ, hands on hips DJ (from 24 cm height) best of five trials with hands on hips | ||
| Yuktasir and Kaya (2009) | Drop jump (60 cm) | n = 28 | 6 weeks (24 sessions) | DJ from 60 cm flight time measured with Newtest 1000 |
| men from sports school | Hamstring stretching | |||
| 3 groups | 4 times per week | |||
| SS: n = 10 | 30 s stretch, 4 sets | |||
| PNF: n = 9 | Intensity | |||
| CG: n = 9 | Not exceeding 5 on | |||
| Standard visual analogue scale (VAS) | ||||
| jump performance: triple hop sprint performance: 20-m sprint | n = 45 | 3 weeks (until 10 sessions completed) | triple hop | |
| healthy and active men | stretching of hamstring muscles | single non dominant leg hop | ||
| 3 groups | 3 times per week, 3 sets of 30 s stretch and 30 s rest | with arm swinging, measured from starting line to heel landing mark | ||
| SS: n = 15 | Intensity: until discomfort sensation on the hamstrings | three trials with 30-s recovery | ||
| DS: n = 15 | 2 min rest between triple hop an sprint | |||
| CG: n = 15 | 20-m sprint: participants start 0.5 m behind with non- | |||
| jump performance | n = 21 | 6 weeks (24 sessions) | Vertical Jump | |
| female track and field athletes (3rd division) | of hamstring stretching | hands on hips - no arm-swing movement two jumps and average of both used for analysis Kistler Quattro Jump Force Plate | ||
| 2 groups | 4 consecutive days per week | 55-m sprint | ||
| SG: n = 10 | 4 sets of 45 s stretch each leg | three- or four-point-position with one finger on the timing device Speedtrap II Wireless Timing System | ||
| CG: = 11 | Intensity: until mild discomfort in hamstring muscle group | single test | ||
| jump performance via broad jump sprint performance: 10-m 35-m sprint Illinois Agility test | n = 23 | 4 weeks (32 sessions) | Broad Jump: with arm swing and countermovement from standing position examined with 10-m/35-m sprint/Agility test: evaluated with Microgate, Racetime2 kit-system and photoelectric cells set at chest height all tests performed on grass pitch | |
| healthy young football players on professional niveau | stretching of lower body | |||
| FG: n = 11 | 2 times per day, 4 days per week | |||
| CG:n = 12 | stretching durations | |||
| week 1: 15 s | ||||
| week 2: 20 s | ||||
| week 3 + 4: 30 s | ||||
| Intensity | ||||
| point of mild discomfort but no pain | ||||
| jump performance: vertical jump, standing long jump sprint performance: 20-m sprint | n = 38 students | 10 weeks (30 sessions) | vertical jump | |
| physically inactive or recreationally active | static stretching of the major lower-extremity muscle groups | Vertec testing device (Questtek Corp.) | ||
| 2 groups | 3 days a week | standing long jump | ||
| STR: n = 19 | 15 different exercises | 5 jumps submaximal for warm-up then best of three with 1 min rest between jumps | ||
| CON: n = 19 | 3 sets of 15 s stretch | 20-m sprint | ||
| Intensity | 5 min rest after long jump before sprint | |||
| stretching without pain | standing start and measured with Speedtrap II, Brower Timing Systems 5 submaximal warm-up sprints allowed best of three with 3 min rest between sprints | |||
| sprint performance: 4.5-m sprint, 9-m sprint | n = 27 men | 6 weeks (18 sessions) | 4.5-m and 9-m sprint: one leg 40 cm behind starting line Best of two used with 3 min rest between each sprint, sprints measured by dual-beam photocell system, Autonics Beam Sensor BL5M-MFR and digital timer, Saint Wien Digital Timer Ty H5K | |
| volleyball player regional level | stretching of lower limbs | |||
| 3 groups | 3 times per week | |||
| SG: n = 11 | 2 sets with 10 s stretch | |||
| DG: n = 7 | Intensity | |||
| CG: n = 9 | maximum joint ROM without pain | |||
| Rodriguez Fernandez et al. (2016) | sprint performance: 30-m sprint | n = 103 | 7 weeks (42 sessions) | Linear 30-m sprint outdoor assessed with Photoelectric ell DSD Laser System, DSD Inc. Foot positioned 50 cm behind start line |
| from 5 teams u18 top regional category | static stretching of hamstring muscles | |||
| 2 groups | 6 days a week | |||
| CG: n = 22 | 4 exercises at the end of training 2 × 30 s stretch | |||
| E.G.,: n = 81 | Intensity | |||
| stretching exercises without pain |
Study characteristics of the included research.
DJ, drop jump (height), SJ, squat jump; RJ, rebound jump CMBJ, counter-block-movement jump, CMJ, countermovement jump; VJ, vertical jump; SLJ, standing long jump; BJ, broad jump; SS, static stretching; DS, dynamic stretching; CG, control group, Group p = power training group, Group S = flexibility training group, Group PS, flexibility and power training group, Group C = control group, HI-SS, high intensity static stretch group; LI-SS, low intensity static stretch group; CON, Non-intervention control group; IG, intervention group; rPA, reduced physical activity group; PNF, proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation group; FG, flexibility group; STR, stretching group (intervention group), E.G.,, experimental group (intervention).
TABLE 2
| Parameter | Author and publication year | 1. Specific eligibility criteria | 2. Randomly allocated to groups | 3. Allocation was concealed | 4. Groups similar baseline | 5. Blinding of subjects | 6. Blinding of therapists | 7. Blinding of assessors | 8. Measured one key outcome from >85% | 9. Received treatment or control condition as allocated or analysed by “intention to treat” | 10. Statistical comparisons of between-group results | 11. Point measures and measures of variability | Results (first question not included) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| jump | Y | Y | N | Y | N | N | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | 6 of 10 | |
| Y | Y | N | Y | N | N | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | 6 of 10 | ||
| Y | Y | N | Y | N | N | N | N | N | Y | Y | 4 of 10 | ||
| Y | Y | N | Y | N | N | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | 6 of 10 | ||
| Y | Y | N | Y | N | N | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | 6 of 10 | ||
| Y | Y | N | Y | N | N | Y | N | Y | Y | Y | 6 of 10 | ||
| Warneke et al. (2022d) | Y | N | N | Y | N | N | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | 5 of 10 | |
| Yuktasir & Kaya, (2009) | Y | Y | N | Y | N | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | 7 of 10 | |
| jump and sprint | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | 8 of 10 | |
| Y | Y | N | Y | N | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | 7 of 10 | ||
| Y | Y | N | Y | N | N | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | 6 of 10 | ||
| Y | Y | N | Y | N | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | 6 of 10 | ||
| sprint | Y | Y | N | Y | N | N | N | N | Y | Y | Y | 5 of 10 | |
| Rodriguez Fernandez et al. (2016) | Y | Y | N | Y | N | N | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | 6 of 10 |
Provides the results of the quality assessment using the PEDro Scale.
After excluding about 4000 articles based on title and abstract, the remaining 27 full texts were checked for eligibility. From the available 26 studies, four articles did not include a non-intervened passive control, while six others did not fulfill the minimum requirements of intervention periods or did not exclusively used static stretching (see Figure 1).
Eight studies exclusively examined jumping performance (
3.1 Qualitative study results
3.1.1 Jumping performance
The intervention period ranged between three (
Stretching duration per session ranged from 10 s (
Six studies included drop jumps from five different heights, six countermovement jumps (single leg in one study (
For jumping performance, effect sizes showed jumping performance increases ranging from 2.3% (
3.1.2 Sprint performance
Six studies were found investigating the effects of chronic stretching programs on sprint performance. A total of 257 subjects were included performing nine different sprint variants between 4.5 m (
Six out of nine sprinting tests showed performance improvements of 1.3% (
3.2 Summary of the results
An overview for the results is illustrated in Table 3, providing an illustrated overview of the results considering the collected parameters and the described effects.
TABLE 3
| Parameter | Author and publication year | Static stretching effect | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jump performance | CMBJ | ||||||||||
| CMJ | |||||||||||
| CMJ | DJ30* | DJ60* | DJ90* | ||||||||
| CMJ | SJ | RJ | |||||||||
| DJ20 | |||||||||||
| Single leg CMJ | |||||||||||
| Warneke et al. (2022d) | CMJ | SJ | DJ24 | ||||||||
| Yuktasir and Kaya (2009) | DJ60 | ||||||||||
| Jump and sprint performance | Triple hop | 20-m sprint | |||||||||
| VJ | 55-m sprint | ||||||||||
| BJ | 10-m sprint | 35-m sprint | Illinois agility test | ||||||||
| VJ | SLJ | 20-m sprint | |||||||||
| Sprint performance | 4.5-m sprint | 9-m sprint | |||||||||
| Rodriguez Fernandez et al. (2016) | 30-m sprint | ||||||||||
Overview of direction of the effects, bright grey illustrates no significant change from pre-to post-test, no color (white) shows a significant improvement of the motor task while fields marked in dark grey showed stretching negatively impacted jumping or sprinting performance.
DJ, drop jump (height), SJ, squat jump; RJ, rebound jump CMBJ, counter-block-movement jump, CMJ, countermovement jump; VJ, vertical jump; SLJ, standing long jump; BJ, broad jump; SS, static stretching; DS, dynamic stretching; CG, control group, Group p = power training group, Group S = flexibility training group, Group PS, flexibility and power training group, Group C = control group, HI-SS, high intensity static stretch group; LI-SS, low intensity static stretch group; CON, Non-intervention control group; IG, intervention group; rPA, reduced physical activity group; PNF, proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation group; FG, flexibility group; STR, stretching group (intervention group), E.G., experimental group (intervention).
3.3 Quantitative analysis of the extracted effects
Quantitative analysis of the effects is illustrated in Figure 2, showing the forest plot for jumping performance (no, short, and long stretch-shortening cycle) (a) and sprinting performance (b).
FIGURE 2

Forest plots for (A) chronic stretching on jumping performance, divided into fast stretch-shortening cycle, slow stretch-shortening cycle and no stretch-shortening cycle jumping actions and (B) chronic stretching on sprinting performance.
Including 25 effects with p = 0.036 there was an overall trivial magnitude effect with ES = 0.16 (0.01–0.31) with a high certainty of evidence. The individual subgroup analyses failed to reach significance for jump performance using the fast SSC (ES = 0.10, p = 0.449), slow SSC (ES = 0.17, p = 0.09) and no SSC (ES = 0.31, p = 0.23). Due to limited number of extracted effect sizes, no further subgroup analysis was performed. With ES = −0.60, p = 0.078, no significant sprinting improvements can be assumed.
Visual funnel plot inspection suggests a publication bias for sprinting performance, while in the jumping performance no asymmetry was observable (Figure 3). With p = 0.25 for jumping and p = 0.002 for sprinting, the Eggers test confirms these results.
FIGURE 3

Funnel plots for visual inspection of a potential publication bias for (A) chronic stretching on jumping performance and (B) chronic stretching on sprinting performance.
4 Discussion
Since recent reviews pointed out chronic stretching programs were sufficient to induce maximal strength increases (
From a physiological point of view, all jumps and sprinting need to apply high forces within a short time period requiring maximal activation via maximal fiber recruitment, frequency, and synchronization (
4.1 The role of maximum strength
According to
4.2 Training specificity
Jump and sprint are coordinated power activities involving both strength (force) and velocity. According to the concept of training specificity (
4.3 Comparison to resistance training routines
Accordingly, performing active multi-joint strength training exercises seems to activate the muscles in a more appropriate way. Referring to high load squat training to beneficially impact sprinting (
In specific training facilities and circumstances, stretching might have some practical applications as an alternative to resistance training (
4.4 The potential role of flexibility in speed strength performance
Stretching is well-known for increasing flexibility/range of motion in humans (Young et al., 2013;
On the other hand, negative effects could be expected as recent literature pointed out a reduction in muscle-tendon stiffness (Takeuchi et al., 2023). One important mechanism leading to increased power in the SSC is the elastic kinetic energy storage in the parallel-elastic structures of the muscle tissue and series-elastic components of the tendons, pre-activation of the muscle and reflex properties of the muscle stretch reflex (
5 Limitations
Meta-analytical approaches in sport and exercise science can be controversial since invalid comparisons are sometimes performed, which can skew the conclusions. Nevertheless, pooling study effects increases the sample size and therefore enhances the statistical power. To provide a well-balanced perspective, an extended qualitative description of the study results was provided to account for heterogeneity in methods. The meta-analytical approaches might be seen as a supplementation to quantify results. Although some short duration stretching interventions sufficiently increased maximal strength (Nelson et al., 2012; Mizuno 2019), consistent stretch-induced strength and muscle size increases were reported after longer stretching durations (≥10 min per session) (Chen et al., 2011; Wohlann et al., 2023; Wohlann et al., 2024, Warneke et al., 2022a, Reiner et al., 2023; Warneke et al., 2022). However, stretching durations of the included studies primarily used short stretching durations of a few minutes. Consequently, especially when considering maximal strength was only one component in the multifactorial construct of jumping and sprinting performance, the included stretching studies did not involve stretching volumes that allow a reasonable assumption of increased athletic performance. However, since there were increases in the Warneke et al. (2022b) study using a weekly volume of 70 min of stretching, future research on stretch-induced jumping and sprinting performance enhancements should include larger stretching dosages. Furthermore, pooled linear sprint performance effects originate from different sprinting distances, starting with 4.5 m (acceleration phase) until 55 m (maximum velocity phase). Therefore, different physiological and biomechanical requirements are addressed, thus, the calculated effect size might be considered with care. However, it seems of limited value to divide these studies in further subgroups, as the number of pooled effects was small. In general, the current stretching study situation calls for further research.
6 Practical applications and conclusion
To date, no beneficial effects of chronic stretching on jumping and sprinting performance could be detected. Due to the limited number of studies and extracted effect sizes with questionable methodological homogeneity, further research with extended intervention periods and longer stretching durations with high intensities seems necessary, since those provided the highest magnitude maximum strength increases.
Statements
Data availability statement
The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/supplementary material, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.
Author contributions
KW: Conceptualization, Formal Analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Software, Visualization, Writing–original draft. PF: Data curation, Methodology, Writing – original draft, Data curation, Methodology, Writing–original draft. GP: Methodology, Resources, Writing–review and editing. AK: Methodology, Supervision, Writing–review and editing. DB: Methodology, Supervision, Writing–review and editing, Methodology, Supervision, Writing–review and editing. TS: Data curation, Methodology, Project administration, Supervision, Writing–review and editing.
Funding
The author(s) declare that financial support was received for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. The authors acknowledge the financial support by the University of Graz.
Acknowledgments
This research was funded in whole, or in part, by the Austrian Science Fund (FWF) (grant DOI 10.55776/J4484). For the purpose of open access, the author has applied a CC BY public copyright licence to any Author Accepted Manuscript version arising from this submission.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
The author(s) declared that they were an editorial board member of Frontiers, at the time of submission. This had no impact on the peer review process and the final decision.
Publisher’s note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
References
1
AlipasaliF.PapadopoulouS. D.GissisI.KomsisG.KomsisS.KyranoudisA.et al (2019). The effect of static and dynamic stretching exercises on sprint ability of recreational male volleyball players. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health16, 2835. 10.3390/ijerph16162835
2
AlipasaliF.PapadopoulouS. D.KyranoudisA. E.GisisI. (2022). The effect of static and dynamic stretching exercises on the jumping ability of recreational male volleyball players. J. Phys. Edu Sport22, 1026–1032. 10.7752/jpes.2022.04130
3
ArntzF.MarkovA.BehmD. G.BehrensM.NegraY.NakamuraM.et al (2023). Chronic effects of static stretching exercises on muscle strength and power in healthy individuals across the lifespan: a systematic review with multi-level meta-analysis. Sports Med.53, 723–745. 10.1007/s40279-022-01806-9
4
AtkinsD.BestD.BrissP. A.EcclesM.Falck-YtterY.FlottorpS.et al (2004). Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ328, 1490. 10.1136/bmj.328.7454.1490
5
AuraO.KomiP. V. (1986). The mechanical efficiency of locomotion in men and women with special emphasis on stretch-shortening cycle exercises. Eur. J. Appl. Physiol. Occup. Physiol.55, 37–43. 10.1007/BF00422890
6
BarbosaG. M.TrajanoG. S.DantasG. A. F.SilvaB. R.VieiraW. H. B. (2020). Chronic effects of static and dynamic stretching on hamstrings eccentric strength and functional performance: a randomized controlled trial. J. Strength Cond. Res.34, 2031–2039. 10.1519/JSC.0000000000003080
7
Bazett-JonesD. M.GibsonM. H.McBrideJ. M. (2008). Sprint and vertical jump performances are not affected by six weeks of static hamstring stretching. J. Strength Cond. Res.22, 25–31. 10.1519/JSC.0b013e31815f99a4
8
BehmD. G. (1995). Neuromuscular implications and applications of resistance training. J. Strength Cond. Res.9, 264–274. 10.1519/1533-4287(1995)009<0264:niaaor>2.3.co;2
9
BehmD. G.GranacherU.WarnekeK.Aragão-SantosJ. C.Da Silva-GrigolettoM. E.KonradA. (2023). Minimalist training: is lower dosage or intensity resistance training effective to improve physical fitness? A narrative review. Sports Med.54, 289–302. 10.1007/s40279-023-01949-3
10
BehmD. G.SaleD. G. (1993). Velocity specificity of resistance training. Sports Med.15, 374–388. 10.2165/00007256-199315060-00003
11
BehmD. G.YoungJ. D.WhittenJ. H. D.ReidJ. C.QuigleyP. J.LowJ.et al (2017). Effectiveness of traditional strength vs. Power training on muscle strength, power and speed with youth: a systematic review and meta-analysisFront. Physiol.8, 423. 10.3389/fphys.2017.00423
12
BrughelliM.CroninJ.LevinG.ChaouachiA. (2008). Understanding change of direction ability in sport: a review of resistance training studies. Sports Med.38, 1045–1063. 10.2165/00007256-200838120-00007
13
BudiniF.ChristovaM. (2023). Enhanced corticospinal excitability in the tibialis anterior during static stretching of the soleus in young healthy individuals. PLoS One18, e0284289. 10.1371/journal.pone.0284289
14
ByrneP. J.MoodyJ. A.CooperS.-M.FarrellE.KinsellaS. (2022). Short-term effects of “composite” training on strength, jump, and sprint performance in hurling players. J. Strength Cond. Res.36, 2253–2261. 10.1519/JSC.0000000000003820
15
ChenC. H.NosakaK.ChenH. L.LinM. J.TsengK. W.ChenT. C. (2019). Effects of flexibility training on eccentric exercise-induced muscle damage. Med. Sci. Sports. Exerc.43 (3), 491–500. 10.1249/MSS.0b013e3181f315ad
16
CuiJ.BlahaC.MoradkhanR.GrayK. S.SinowayL. I. (2006). Muscle sympathetic nerve activity responses to dynamic passive muscle stretch in humans. J. Physiol.576, 625–634. 10.1113/jphysiol.2006.116640
17
DelextratA.CohenD. (2008). Physiological testing of basketball players: toward a standard evaluation of anaerobic fitness. J. Strength Cond. Res.22, 1066–1072. 10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181739d9b
18
DelextratA.CohenD. (2009). Strength, power, speed, and agility of women basketball players according to playing position. J. Strength Cond. Res.23, 1974–1981. 10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181b86a7e
19
de MortonN. A. (2009). The PEDro scale is a valid measure of the methodological quality of clinical trials: a demographic study. Aust. J. Physiother.55, 129–133. 10.1016/s0004-9514(09)70043-1
20
DontiO.PapiaK.ToubekisA.DontiA.SandsW. A.BogdanisG. C. (2021). Acute and long-term effects of two different static stretching training protocols on range of motion and vertical jump in preadolescent athletes. Biol. Sport38, 579–586. 10.5114/biolsport.2021.101127
21
EriksenM. B.FrandsenT. F. (2018). The impact of patient, intervention, comparison, outcome (PICO) as a search strategy tool on literature search quality: a systematic review. J. Med. Libr. Assoc.106, 420–431. 10.5195/jmla.2018.345
22
FaigenbaumA. D.MyerG. D. (2010). Resistance training among young athletes: safety, efficacy and injury prevention effects. Br. J. Sports Med.44, 56–63. 10.1136/bjsm.2009.068098
23
FaraoneS. V. (2008). Interpreting estimates of treatment effects: implications for managed care. P T33, 700–711.
24
FleckS. J.KraemerW. J. (2004). Designing resistance training programs. 3rd Edn.Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
25
FreitasS. R.MendesB.Le SantG.AndradeR. J.NordezA.MilanovicZ. (2018). Can chronic stretching change the muscle-tendon mechanical properties? A Review. Scand. J. Med. Sci. Sports28, 794–806. 10.1111/sms.12957
26
FreitasS. R.Mil-HomensP. (2015). Effect of 8-week high-intensity stretching training on biceps femoris architecture. J. Strength Cond. Res.29, 1737–1740. 10.1519/JSC.0000000000000800
27
FukashiroS.AbeT.ShibayamaA.BrechueW. F. (2002). Comparison of viscoelastic characteristics in triceps surae between Black and White athletes. Acta Physiol. Scand.175, 183–187. 10.1046/j.1365-201X.2002.00985.x
28
HadjicharalambousM. (2016). The effects of regular supplementary flexibility training on physical fitness performance of young high-level soccer players. J. Sports Med. Phys. Fit.56, 699–708.
29
HerringS. W.GrimmA. F.GrimmB. R. (1984). Regulation of sarcomere number in skeletal muscle: a comparison of hypotheses. Muscle Nerve7, 161–173. 10.1002/mus.880070213
30
HunterJ. P.MarshallR. N. (2002). Effects of power and flexibility training on vertical jump technique. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc34, 478–486. 10.1097/00005768-200203000-00015
31
IkedaN.RyushiT. (2021). Effects of 6-week static stretching of knee extensors on flexibility, muscle strength, jump performance, and muscle endurance. J. Strength Cond. Res.35, 715–723. 10.1519/JSC.0000000000002819
32
InamiT.ShimizuT.BabaR.NakagakiA. (2014). Acute changes in autonomic nerve activity during passive static stretching. Am. J. Sports Sci. Med.2, 166–170. 10.12691/ajssm-2-4-9
33
KalkhovenJ. T.WatsfordM. L. (2018). The relationship between mechanical stiffness and athletic performance markers in sub-elite footballers. J. Sports Sci.36, 1022–1029. 10.1080/02640414.2017.1349921
34
KallerudH.GleesonN.KallerudH.GleesonÁ. N.GleesonN. (2013). Effects of stretching on performances involving stretch-shortening cycles. Sports Med.43, 733–750. 10.1007/s40279-013-0053-x
35
KeinerM.BraunerT.KadlubowskiB.SanderA.WirthK. (2022a). The influence of maximum squatting strength on jump and sprint performance: a cross-sectional analysis of 492 youth soccer players. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health19, 5835. 10.3390/ijerph19105835
36
KeinerM.KadlubowskiB.SanderA.HartmannH.WirthK. (2022b). Effects of 10 months of speed, functional, and traditional strength training on strength, linear sprint, change of direction, and jump performance in trained adolescent soccer players. J. Strength Cond. Res.36, 2236–2246. 10.1519/JSC.0000000000003807
37
KokkonenJ.NelsonA. G.EldredgeC.WinchesterJ. B. (2007). Chronic static stretching improves exercise performance. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc.39, 1825–1831. 10.1249/mss.0b013e3181238a2b
38
KomiP. V. (1984). Physiological and biomechanical correlates of muscle function: effects of muscle structure and stretch-shortening cycle on force and speed. Exerc Sport Sci. Rev.12, 81–122. 10.1249/00003677-198401000-00006
39
KomiP. V. (2003). STRENGTH AND POWER IN SPORT VOLUME III OF THE ENCYCLOPAEDIA OF SPORTS MEDICINE.
40
KraemerW. J.RatamessN. A. (2004). Fundamentals of resistance training: progression and exercise prescription. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc36, 674–688. 10.1249/01.MSS.0000121945.36635.61
41
KruseA.RivaresC.WeideG.TilpM.JaspersR. T. (2021). Stimuli for adaptations in muscle length and the length range of active force exertion—a narrative review. Front. Physiol.12, 742034. 10.3389/fphys.2021.742034
42
LesinskiM.PrieskeO.GranacherU. (2016). Effects and dose-response relationships of resistance training on physical performance in youth athletes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Br. J. Sports Med.50, 781–795. 10.1136/bjsports-2015-095497
43
LohmannL. H.WarnekeK.SchiemannS.FaberI. R. (2022). High-load squat training improves sprinting performance in junior elite-level soccer players: a critically appraised topic. Int. J. Athl. Ther. Train.27, 276–281. 10.1123/ijatt.2021-0066
44
MagnussonS. P.SimonsenE. B.AagaardP.SørensenH.KjaerM. (1996). A mechanism for altered flexibility in human skeletal muscle. J. Physiol.497, 291–298. 10.1113/jphysiol.1996.sp021768
45
MaherC. G.SherringtonC.HerbertR. D.MoseleyA. M.ElkinsM. (2003). Reliability of the PEDro scale for rating quality of randomized controlled trials. Phys. Ther.83, 713–721. 10.1093/ptj/83.8.713
46
ManchadoC.Tortosa-MartínezJ.VilaH.FerragutC.PlatenP. (2013). Performance factors in women's team handball: physical and physiological aspects--a review. J. Strength Cond. Res.27, 1708–1719. 10.1519/JSC.0b013e3182891535
47
MarkovicG.NewtonR. U. (2007). Does plyometric training improve vertical jump height? A meta-analytical review * Commentary. Br. J. Sports Med.41, 349–355. 10.1136/bjsm.2007.035113
48
MedeirosD. M.LimaC. S. (2017). Influence of chronic stretching on muscle performance: systematic review. Hum. Mov. Sci.54, 220–229. 10.1016/j.humov.2017.05.006
49
MedeirosD. M.MartiniT. F. (2018). Chronic effect of different types of stretching on ankle dorsiflexion range of motion: systematic review and meta-analysis. Foot(Edinb)34, 28–35. 10.1016/j.foot.2017.09.006
50
MizunoT. (2019). Combined effects of static stretching and electrical stimulation on joint range of motion and muscle strength. J. Strength. Cond. Res.33 (10), 2694–2703. 10.1519/JSC.0000000000002260
51
MorieM.ReidK. F.MiciekR.LajevardiN.ChoongK.KrasnoffJ. B.et al (2010). Habitual physical activity levels are associated with performance in measures of physical function and mobility in older men. J. Am. Geriatr. Soc.58, 1727–1733. 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2010.03012.x
52
MorrisS. J.OliverJ. L.PedleyJ. S.HaffG. G.LloydR. S. (2022). Comparison of weightlifting, traditional resistance training and plyometrics on strength, power and speed: a systematic review with meta-analysis. Sports Med.52, 1533–1554. 10.1007/s40279-021-01627-2
53
MorseC. I.DegensH.SeynnesO. R.MaganarisC. N.JonesD. A. (2008). The acute effect of stretching on the passive stiffness of the human gastrocnemius muscle tendon unit. J. Physiology586, 97–106. 10.1113/jphysiol.2007.140434
54
NelsonA. G.KokkonenJ.WinchesterJ. B.KalaniW.PetersonK.KenlyM. S.et al (2012). A 10-week stretching program increases strength in the contralateral muscle. J. Strength. Cond. Res.26 (3), 832–836. 10.1519/JSC.0b013e3182281b41
55
NakamuraM.YoshidaR.SatoS.YahataK.MurakamiY.KasaharaK.et al (2021). Comparison between high- and low-intensity static stretching training program on active and passive properties of plantar flexors. Front. Physiol.12, 796497. 10.3389/fphys.2021.796497
56
PageM. J.McKenzieJ. E.BossuytP. M.BoutronI.HoffmannT. C.MulrowC. D.et al (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJn71, n71. 10.1136/bmj.n71
57
PanidiI.BogdanisG. C.TerzisG.DontiA.KonradA.GaspariV.et al (2021). Muscle architectural and functional adaptations following 12-weeks of stretching in adolescent female athletes. Front. Physiol.12, 701338. 10.3389/fphys.2021.701338
58
PanidiI.DontiO.KonradA.PetrosC. D.TerzisG.MouratidisA.et al (2023). Muscle architecture adaptations to static stretching training: a systematic review with meta-analysis. Sports Med. Open9, 47. 10.1186/s40798-023-00591-7
59
PattiA.GiustinoV.HiroseN.MessinaG.CataldiS.GrigoliG.et al (2022). Effects of an experimental short-time high-intensity warm-up on explosive muscle strength performance in soccer players: a pilot study. Front. Physiol.13, 984305. 10.3389/fphys.2022.984305
60
Ramirez-CampilloR.AndradeD. C.NikolaidisP. T.MoranJ.ClementeF. M.ChaabeneH.et al (2020). Effects of plyometric jump training on vertical jump height of volleyball players: a systematic review with meta-analysis of randomized-controlled trial. J. Sports Sci. Med.19, 489–499.
61
Ramirez-CampilloR.García-HermosoA.MoranJ.ChaabeneH.NegraY.ScanlanA. T. (2022). The effects of plyometric jump training on physical fitness attributes in basketball players: a meta-analysis. J. Sport Health Sci.11, 656–670. 10.1016/j.jshs.2020.12.005
62
ReinerM.GabrielA.SommerD.BernsteinerD.TilpM.KonradA. (2023). Effects of a high-volume 7-week pectoralis muscle stretching training on muscle function and muscle stiffness. Sports. Med. Open.9 (1), 40. 10.1186/s40798-023-00582-8
63
RequenaB.GarciaI.RquenaF.BresselE.Saez-Saez de VillarrealE.CroninJ. (2014). Association between traditional standing vertical jumps and a soccer-specific vertical jump. Eur. J. Sport Sci.14, 398–405. 10.1080/17461391.2012.708790
64
Rodriguez FernandezA.SanchezJ.Rodriguez MarroyoJ. A.VillaJ. G. (2016). Effects of seven weeks of static hamstring stretching on flexibility and sprint performance in young soccer players according to their playing position. J. Sports Med. Phys. Fit.56, 345–351.
65
SchwendingerF.PoceccoE. (2020). Counteracting physical inactivity during the COVID-19 pandemic: evidence-based recommendations for home-based exercise. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health17, 3909–3916. 10.3390/ijerph17113909
66
ShrierI. (2004). Does stretching improve performance? A systematic and critical review of the literature. Clin. J. Sport Med.14, 267–273. 10.1097/00042752-200409000-00004
67
TakeuchiK.NakamuraM.KonradA.MizunoT. (2023). Long‐term static stretching can decrease muscle stiffness: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Scand. J. Med. Sci. Sports33, 1294–1306. 10.1111/sms.14402
68
WagnerH.FinkenzellerT.WürthS.von DuvillardS. P. (2014). Individual and team performance in team-handball: a review. J. Sports Sci. Med.13, 808–816.
69
WarnekeK.FreundP. A.SchiemannS. (2022a). Long-Lasting stretching induces muscle hypertrophy: a meta-analysis of animal studies. J. Sci. Sport Exerc5, 289–301. 10.1007/s42978-022-00191-z
70
WarnekeK.KeinerM.LohmannL. H.HillebrechtM.WirthK.SchiemannS. (2022b). The influence of maximum strength performance in seated calf raises on counter movement jump and squat jump in elite junior basketball players. Sport Mont.20, 63–68. 10.26773/smj.220610
71
WarnekeK.KeinerM.SchiemannS.LohmannL. H.WirthK. (2022c). Influence of maximal strength performance in front squat and deadlift on linear sprint and jump performance in male youth elite basketball players. Ger. J. Sport Res.53, 10–18. 10.1007/s12662-022-00863-6
72
WarnekeK.KonradA.KeinerM.ZechA.NakamuraM.HillebrechtM.et al (2022d). Using daily stretching to counteract performance decreases as a result of reduced physical activity—a controlled trial. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health19, 15571. 10.3390/ijerph192315571
73
WarnekeK.LohmannL. H.LimaC. D.HollanderK.KonradA.ZechA.et al (2023a). Physiology of stretch-mediated hypertrophy and strength increases: a narrative review. Sports Med.53, 2055–2075. 10.1007/s40279-023-01898-x
74
WarnekeK.WirthK.KeinerM.LohmannL. H.HillebrechtM.BrinkmannA.et al (2023b). Comparison of the effects of long-lasting static stretching and hypertrophy training on maximal strength, muscle thickness and flexibility in the plantar flexors. Eur. J. Appl. Physiol.123, 1773–1787. 10.1007/s00421-023-05184-6
75
WirthK. (2011). Exzentrisches Krafttraining: auswirkungen auf unterschiedliche Maximal-und Schnellkraftparameter.
76
WirthK.HartmannH.SanderA.MickelC.SzilvasE.KeinerM. (2016). The impact of back squat and leg-press exercises on maximal strength and speed-strength parameters. J. Strength Cond. Res.30, 1205–1212. 10.1519/JSC.0000000000001228
77
WisløffU.CastagnaC.HelgerudJ.JonesR.HoffJ. (2004). Strong correlation of maximal squat strength with sprint performance and vertical jump height in elite soccer players. Br. J. Sports Med.38, 285–288. 10.1136/bjsm.2002.002071
78
WohlannT.WarnekeK.HillebrechtM.PetersmannA.FerrautiA.SchiemannS. (2023). Effects of daily static stretch training over 6 weeks on maximal strength, muscle thickness, contraction properties, and flexibility. Front. Sports. Act. Living.5, 1139065. 10.3389/fspor.2023.1139065
79
WohlannT.WarnekeK.KalderV.BehmD. G.SchmidtT.SchiemannS. (2024). Influence of 8-week of supervised static stretching or resistance training of pectoral major muscles on maximal strength, muscle thickness and range of motion. Eur. J. Appl. Physiol.19. 10.1007/s00421-023-05413-y
80
YoungR.NixS.WholohanA.BradhurstR.ReedL. (2013). Interventions for increasing ankle joint dorsiflexion: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J. Foot Ankle Res.6, 46–10. 10.1186/1757-1146-6-46
81
YuktasirB.KayaF. (2009). Investigation into the long-term effects of static and PNF stretching exercises on range of motion and jump performance. J. Bodyw. Mov. Ther.13, 11–21. 10.1016/j.jbmt.2007.10.001
82
ZatsiorskyV. M.KraemerJ.FryA. C. (2020). Science and practice of strength training. Hum. Kinet.
83
ZöllnerA. M.AbilezO. J.BölM.KuhlE. (2012). Stretching skeletal muscle: chronic muscle lengthening through sarcomerogenesis. PLoS One7, e45661. 10.1371/journal.pone.0045661
Summary
Keywords
long-term, athletic performance, stretch-shortening cycle, plyometrics, speed strength, stretch training, static stretching
Citation
Warneke K, Freundorfer P, Plöschberger G, Behm DG, Konrad A and Schmidt T (2024) Effects of chronic static stretching interventions on jumping and sprinting performance–a systematic review with multilevel meta-analysis. Front. Physiol. 15:1372689. doi: 10.3389/fphys.2024.1372689
Received
18 January 2024
Accepted
13 March 2024
Published
26 March 2024
Volume
15 - 2024
Edited by
Marko Dragisa Stojanovic, University of Novi Sad, Serbia
Reviewed by
Valerio Giustino, University of Palermo, Italy
Luca Petrigna, University of Catania, Italy
Updates

Check for updates
Copyright
© 2024 Warneke, Freundorfer, Plöschberger, Behm, Konrad and Schmidt.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Andreas Konrad, Andreas.konrad@uni-graz.at
ORCID: Konstantin Warneke, orcid.org/0000-0003-4964-2867; Patrik Freundorfer, orcid.org/0000-0003-4964-2867; David G. Behm, orcid.org/0000-0002-9406-6056; Andreas Konrad, orcid.org/0000-0002-5588-1824; Tobias Schmidt, orcid.org/0000-0002-0172-6001
Disclaimer
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.