Stretch Tolerance vs. Real Tissue Change
Whether range-of-motion gains reflect stretch tolerance (a sensory change) or mechanical change in the muscle-tendon unit: what the reviews and trials on this entry measured. Their conclusions are not yet recorded in this library, so this entry states no mechanism.
None, informational content.
- Persistent joint pain or sudden loss of range of motion, refer to a physician or physical therapist.
What the evidence says
The sources on this entry studied the mechanism behind range-of-motion change: stretch tolerance, a sensory and perceptual measure, alongside passive muscle-tendon stiffness and muscle-tendon architecture, in single sessions and over training periods. Ingram 2025 is a systematic review and meta-analysis of 65 studies and 1542 participants. Takeuchi 2023 is a meta-analysis of 17 studies on long-term stiffness change, and a second Takeuchi 2023 paper is a meta-analysis. Konrad 2019 and Konrad 2020 are randomised trials of the time course of acute changes, and Støve 2021 is a randomised trial of stretch tolerance and pain modulation; Hatano 2017 and Longo 2021 are randomised trials, and Moltubakk 2021 is a non-randomised trial. The sources' conclusions are not yet recorded in this library, so this entry states no share of range-of-motion change for stretch tolerance or for tissue change, and no effect of training length on stiffness or architecture.
- ROM gains always mean the muscle got longer, often it is increased tolerance to the stretch sensation.
- Stretching physically elongates muscle fibers in every case.
- Agreement
- Direction recorded for 0 of 9 sources; not yet recorded for the rest.
- The claim's outcome
- Outcome not yet recorded
- Certainty
- No source states a certainty rating.
- Authors
- Sources share authors: A. Konrad (first author of 2 sources); Kosuke Takeuchi (first author of 2 sources); M. Tilp (senior author of 2 sources); Takamasa Mizuno (senior author of 2 sources).
What each source measured and concluded (9)
- How it was read
- read in full text
- How it was read
- read in full text
- What the review says it includes
- meta-analysis
- Studies and participants, as stated
- N = not reported participants across 17 studies
- How it was read
- read in full text
- What the review says it includes
- meta-analysis, systematic review
- Studies and participants, as stated
- N = 1542 participants across 65 studies
- How it was read
- read in full text
- How it was read
- read in full text
- How it was read
- read in full text
- How it was read
- read in full text
- How it was read
- read in full text
- How it was read
- read in full text
Every source below is shown with its study design and links to the original study. This is the audit trail.