Laboratory of Human Motricity Biosciences (LABIMH), Federal University of State of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
J Strength Cond Res. 2012 Sep;26(9):2447-52. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e31823f2b36.
The purpose of this study was to examine the acute effects of 3 different stretching methods combined with a warm-up protocol on vertical jump performance. Sixteen young tennis players (14.5 ± 2.8 years; 175 ± 5.6 cm; 64.0 ± 11.1 kg) were randomly assigned to 4 different experimental conditions on 4 successive days. Each session consisted of a general and specific warm-up, with 5 minutes of running followed by 10 jumps, accompanied by one of the subsequent conditions: (a) Control Condition (CC)-5 minutes of passive rest; (b) Passive Stretching Condition (PSC)-5 minutes of passive static stretching; (c) Active Stretching Condition (ASC)-5 minutes of active static stretching; and (d) Dynamic Stretching Condition (DC)-5 minutes of dynamic stretching. After each intervention, the subjects performed 3 squat jumps (SJs) and 3 countermovement jumps (CMJs), which were measured electronically. For the SJ, 1-way repeated measures analysis of variance (CC × PSC × ASC × DC) revealed significant decreases for ASC (28.7 ± 4.7 cm; p = 0.01) and PSC (28.7 ± 4.3 cm; p = 0.02) conditions when compared with CC (29.9 ± 5.0 cm). For CMJs, there were no significant decreases (p > 0.05) when all stretching conditions were compared with the CC. Significant increases in SJ performance were observed when comparing the DC (29.6 ± 4.9 cm; p = 0.02) with PSC (28.7 ± 4.3 cm). Significant increases in CMJ performance were observed when comparing the conditions ASC (34.0 ± 6.0 cm; p = 0.04) and DC (33.7 ± 5.5 cm; p = 0.03) with PSC (32.6 ± 5.5 cm). A dynamic stretching intervention appears to be more suitable for use as part of a warm-up in young athletes.
本研究旨在探讨 3 种不同拉伸方法与热身方案相结合对垂直跳跃表现的急性影响。16 名年轻网球运动员（14.5 ± 2.8 岁；175 ± 5.6cm；64.0 ± 11.1kg）在 4 天内被随机分配到 4 种不同的实验条件下。每次训练包括一般性和专项热身，包括 5 分钟的跑步，然后进行 10 次跳跃，同时进行以下 4 种条件之一：（a）对照组（CC）-5 分钟被动休息；（b）被动拉伸组（PSC）-5 分钟被动静态拉伸；（c）主动拉伸组（ASC）-5 分钟主动静态拉伸；（d）动态拉伸组（DC）-5 分钟动态拉伸。每次干预后，受试者进行 3 次深蹲跳（SJ）和 3 次反向跳（CMJ），并进行电子测量。对于 SJ，单向重复测量方差分析（CC×PSC×ASC×DC）显示 ASC（28.7 ± 4.7cm；p=0.01）和 PSC（28.7 ± 4.3cm；p=0.02）条件下的 SJ 显著下降与 CC（29.9 ± 5.0cm）相比。对于 CMJ，当与 CC 相比时，所有拉伸条件均无明显下降（p＞0.05）。与 PSC（28.7 ± 4.3cm）相比，SJ 性能显著提高时，观察到 DC（29.6 ± 4.9cm；p=0.02）的变化。当与 PSC（32.6 ± 5.5cm）相比时，CMJ 性能显著提高时，观察到 ASC（34.0 ± 6.0cm；p=0.04）和 DC（33.7 ± 5.5cm；p=0.03）的变化。动态拉伸干预似乎更适合作为年轻运动员热身的一部分。
