Skip to content

Acute Effects of Static Stretching on Muscle Strength and Power: An Attempt to Clarify Previous Caveats.

PMID 31849713 (2019): stretch, stretching — Injury risk (study note for endurance athletes).

Last updated/Feb 23, 2026, 10:34 PM

Study note • PMID 31849713

Acute Effects of Static Stretching on Muscle Strength and Power: An Attempt to Clarify Previous Caveats.

Frontiers in physiology2019 • DOI 10.3389/fphys.2019.01468
Evidence C60/100
Action 2: Consider

Worth trying if it fits your goal and context.

ELI5

In plain language

The effects of static stretching (StS) on subsequent strength and power activities has been one of the most debated topics in sport science literature over the past decades. (review; n=22 trained athletes).

In this review, the abstract is mixed or unclear for Injury risk. Treat this as a signal, not a guarantee; confirm methods and context in the full paper.

Takeaways

What the abstract suggests

  • Study question: The effects of static stretching (StS) on subsequent strength and power activities has been one of the most debated topics in sport science literature over the past decades.
  • In this review, the abstract is mixed or unclear for Injury risk.
  • Population: n=22 trained athletes.
  • Protocol cues (full paper): 30 min • 5 min • 0 min • 10 min • 1°C.

Protocol

Protocol (as reported)

  • Intervention/exposure: stretch, stretching.
  • Dose/time/duration cues found in the full paper: 30 min • 5 min • 0 min • 10 min • 1°C.
  • Outcomes: Injury risk.
  • Replication note: abstracts often omit adherence and timing; confirm details before changing training or supplementation.

Fit

Who it helps, and who should skip it

Who it helps

  • Athletes similar to the study population (n=22 trained athletes) working on mobility.
  • Athletes who can measure Injury risk with a repeatable workout or time-trial effort.

Who should skip

  • If you have symptoms or conditions that make the intervention risky, get professional guidance.
  • If you’re near race day and can’t safely test, defer the experiment.

Methods

What the study actually did

  • Design: review (randomized, crossover).
  • Population: n=22 trained athletes.
  • Outcomes measured: Injury risk.
  • Protocol cues (paper): 30 min • 5 min • 0 min • 10 min • 1°C.
  • Source: PubMed PMID 31849713 (2019) — Frontiers in physiology.

Full paper

What the full paper adds

  • Design features (paper): randomized, crossover.
  • Participants (paper): n=22 trained athletes.
  • More protocol detail (paper): 30 min • 5 min • 0 min • 10 min • 1°C.

Results excerpt

What the abstract reports

It seems that during short-duration StS, neuromuscular activation and musculotendinous stiffness appear not to be affected compared with long-duration StS.

Note: excerpts are short; for full context, read the paper.

Limits

Limitations & bias

  • Abstract-only summaries can miss critical details (population, protocol, adherence, and context).
  • Reviews and consensus statements mix protocols and populations; recommendations may not match your exact constraints.
  • If your context differs (elite vs recreational; cycling vs running), adjust expectations and be conservative.
  • This is performance information, not medical advice.

Coaching beta

Get a plan that adapts to your life.

Join the 26weeks.ai TestFlight beta for adaptive coaching, recovery-aware adjustments, and race-week reminders.

Keep going

Sources