Summary of efficacy of stretching in the workplace to prevent/minimise risk of injury
Stretching just doesn’t have the effects that most people hope it does. Plentiful research has shown that it doesn’t warm you up, prevent soreness or injury, enhance performance, or physically change muscles. Although it can boost flexibility, the value of this is unclear, and no other measurable and significant benefit to stretching has ever been proven. Interestingly there is the strength loss resulting from acute static stretching has been termed, “stretch-induced strength loss”.
A systematic review of the literature (albeit in 2006) for the efficiency or performing a warm up routine found, ‘there is insufficient evidence to endorse or discontinue routine warm-up prior to physical activity to prevent injury among sports participants. However, the weight of evidence is in favour of a decreased risk of injury. Further well-conducted randomised controlled trials are needed to determine the role of warming up prior to exercise in relation to injury prevention.’
Stretching: The evidence
- Stretching is not an effective warmup
- Stretching does not prevent exercise soreness
- Stretching does not prevent injury
- Stretching can cause injuries (if not done correctly and gives false confidence)
- Stretching does increase flexibility – but so what!
One shortcoming of this research is that many of the studies on the effectiveness of stretching programs rely on subjective rather than objective measurements. Demonstrating an improvement in self-ratings of an overall feeling of well-being does not address the impact on human performance or injury reduction. Some of the objective measures used do not translate directly to impact on the job. For instance, demonstrating that a workplace stretching programme improved range of motion among employees does not indicate that the programme was effective in meeting its primary goal of reducing MSD injuries. The real question is whether the stretching program actually reduces injury rates.
Cost of stretching programme and ROI
One comment could be that “stretching might not be proven to reduce injuries but it does not cost anything to do.” However, in reality, the time taken to implement employer-mandated stretching programmes does add up, and must include the time when production and work is not performed.
Stretching programmes add measurable non-value-added cost for results that are not yet proven to be successful. In contrast, engineering controls have consistently delivered successful results when applied to reducing MSDs. With limited resources available to invest in the prevention of MSDs, it makes sense to pursue proven methods. Research by Goggins, et al. (2008) showed that engineering controls were much more cost-effective (40-100%) than controls that rely on behaviours in reducing MSDs numbers, incidence rates, lost work days, and workers’ compensation costs.
Stretching should not be part of an ergonomics programme, ergonomics is ‘The science of fitting workplace conditions and job demands to the capabilities of the working population’ – stretching is about trying the change the worker and therefore does not fit in this definition.
