Superiority of Dynamic Stretching over Static and Combined Stretching Protocols for Repeated Sprint Performance in Elite Male Soccer Players.

IF 2.9 Q2 SPORT SCIENCES
Sports Pub Date : 2025-08-18 DOI:10.3390/sports13080275
Ridha Aouadi, Mohamed Amine Ltifi, Halil İbrahim Ceylan, Mohamed Chedly Jlid, Nicola Luigi Bragazzi
{"title":"Superiority of Dynamic Stretching over Static and Combined Stretching Protocols for Repeated Sprint Performance in Elite Male Soccer Players.","authors":"Ridha Aouadi, Mohamed Amine Ltifi, Halil İbrahim Ceylan, Mohamed Chedly Jlid, Nicola Luigi Bragazzi","doi":"10.3390/sports13080275","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study aimed to examine the effects of different stretching techniques on repeated sprint performance and to assess the influence of the sequence in which static and dynamic stretching are performed. Ten male Division II soccer players (age: 22.80 ± 1.13 years; height: 180.60 ± 3.59 cm; body mass: 70.60 ± 6.04 kg) completed a repeated sprint test consisting of 6 × 30 m sprints after five different warm-up protocols in a randomized, counterbalanced design: (1) general warm-up without stretching (NS), (2) static stretching (SS), (3) dynamic stretching (DS), (4) SS followed by DS (SS-DS), and (5) DS followed by SS (DS-SS). Stretching was performed during the recovery periods between sprints: ~6 min for SS and DS, and ~12 min for combined protocols. Sessions were spaced 72 h apart. Performance metrics included mean sprint time, best sprint time, and total sprint time. ANOVA and Cohen's d were used for statistical analysis. Repeated sprint test performance was significantly enhanced after DS compared to SS, DS-SS, and SS-DS (<i>p</i> = 0.042-0.002; ES = 0.31-2.26), but not significantly different from NS (<i>p</i> > 0.05). SS had a detrimental effect when compared to DS and NS (<i>p</i> < 0.05; ES = 1.86-2.26). Improvements were observed in mean sprint time and total sprint time across all six sprints (<i>p</i> = 0.042-0.006; ES = 0.31-2.26) and in best sprint time (<i>p</i> = 0.006-0.002; ES = 0.89-1.86). In conclusion, DS prior to repeated sprint test improves performance compared to SS and combined methods. NS also supports strong performance but shows a slight advantage over SS and combinations. Incorporating DS into warm-up routines is recommended to optimize sprint performance, reduce injury risk, and support athlete preparation.</p>","PeriodicalId":53303,"journal":{"name":"Sports","volume":"13 8","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12389893/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sports","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/sports13080275","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SPORT SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study aimed to examine the effects of different stretching techniques on repeated sprint performance and to assess the influence of the sequence in which static and dynamic stretching are performed. Ten male Division II soccer players (age: 22.80 ± 1.13 years; height: 180.60 ± 3.59 cm; body mass: 70.60 ± 6.04 kg) completed a repeated sprint test consisting of 6 × 30 m sprints after five different warm-up protocols in a randomized, counterbalanced design: (1) general warm-up without stretching (NS), (2) static stretching (SS), (3) dynamic stretching (DS), (4) SS followed by DS (SS-DS), and (5) DS followed by SS (DS-SS). Stretching was performed during the recovery periods between sprints: ~6 min for SS and DS, and ~12 min for combined protocols. Sessions were spaced 72 h apart. Performance metrics included mean sprint time, best sprint time, and total sprint time. ANOVA and Cohen's d were used for statistical analysis. Repeated sprint test performance was significantly enhanced after DS compared to SS, DS-SS, and SS-DS (p = 0.042-0.002; ES = 0.31-2.26), but not significantly different from NS (p > 0.05). SS had a detrimental effect when compared to DS and NS (p < 0.05; ES = 1.86-2.26). Improvements were observed in mean sprint time and total sprint time across all six sprints (p = 0.042-0.006; ES = 0.31-2.26) and in best sprint time (p = 0.006-0.002; ES = 0.89-1.86). In conclusion, DS prior to repeated sprint test improves performance compared to SS and combined methods. NS also supports strong performance but shows a slight advantage over SS and combinations. Incorporating DS into warm-up routines is recommended to optimize sprint performance, reduce injury risk, and support athlete preparation.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

优秀男子足球运动员重复冲刺运动中动态拉伸优于静态拉伸和组合拉伸。
本研究旨在检验不同拉伸技术对重复冲刺表现的影响,并评估静态和动态拉伸的顺序的影响。10名男子二级足球运动员(年龄22.80±1.13岁,身高180.60±3.59 cm,体重70.60±6.04 kg)在五种不同的热身方案(1)一般热身不拉伸(NS),(2)静态拉伸(SS),(3)动态拉伸(DS),(4)先拉伸后拉伸(SS-DS),(5)先拉伸后拉伸(DS-SS))后完成6 × 30米短跑的重复冲刺试验。在短跑之间的恢复期间进行拉伸:SS和DS为~6分钟,联合方案为~12分钟。会议间隔72小时。性能指标包括平均冲刺时间、最佳冲刺时间和总冲刺时间。采用方差分析和Cohen’s d进行统计分析。与SS、DS-SS和SS-DS相比,DS-SS后重复冲刺测试成绩显著提高(p = 0.042-0.002; ES = 0.31-2.26),但与NS无显著差异(p < 0.05)。与DS和NS相比,SS有不利影响(p < 0.05; ES = 1.86 ~ 2.26)。在所有六个冲刺阶段中,平均冲刺时间和总冲刺时间均有改善(p = 0.042-0.006; ES = 0.31-2.26),最佳冲刺时间(p = 0.006-0.002; ES = 0.89-1.86)。综上所述,与重复冲刺测试前的DS相比,SS和组合方法提高了性能。NS也支持强大的性能,但比SS和组合显示出轻微的优势。建议将DS纳入热身程序,以优化短跑表现,减少受伤风险,并支持运动员的准备工作。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Sports
Sports SPORT SCIENCES-
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
7.40%
发文量
167
审稿时长
11 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信