Haddad Monoem, Dridi Amir, Chtara Moktar, Chaouachi Anis, Wong Del P, Behm David, Chamari Karim
1Tunisian Research Laboratory "Sports Performance Optimisation," National Center of Medicine and Science in Sports (CNMSS), Tunis, Tunisia; 2University of Jandouba, ISSEP Kef, Tunisia; 3University of Manouba, ISSEP Ksar Saîd, Tunisia; 4Human Performance Laboratory, Technological and Higher Education Institute of Hong Kong (THEi), Hong Kong; 5School of Human Kinetics and Recreation, Memorial University of Newfoundland, Newfoundland, Canada; and 6Research and Education Centre, Aspetar, Qatar Orthopaedic and Sports Medicine Hospital, Doha.
J Strength Cond Res. 2014 Jan;28(1):140-6. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e3182964836.
The aim of this study was to compare the effects of static vs. dynamic stretching (DS) on explosive performances and repeated sprint ability (RSA) after a 24-hour delay. Sixteen young male soccer players performed 15 minutes of static stretching (SS), DS, or a no-stretch control condition (CC) 24 hours before performing explosive performances and RSA tests. This was a within-subject repeated measures study with SS, DS, and CC being counterbalanced. Stretching protocols included 2 sets of 7 minutes 30 seconds (2 repetitions of 30 seconds with a 15-second passive recovery) for 5 muscle groups (quadriceps, hamstring, calves, adductors, and hip flexors). Twenty-four hours later (without any kind of stretching in warm-up), the players were tested for the 30-m sprint test (with 10- and 20-m lap times), 5 jump test (5JT), and RSA test. Significant differences were observed between CC, SS, and DS with 5JT (F = 9.99, p < 0.00, effect size [ES] = 0.40), 10-m sprint time (F = 46.52, p < 0.00, ES = 0.76), 20-m sprint time (F = 18.44, p < 0.000, ES = 0.55), and 30-m sprint time (F = 34.25, p < 0.000, ES = 0.70). The significantly better performance (p < 0.05) was observed after DS as compared with that after CC and SS in 5JT, and sprint times for 10, 20, and 30 m. In contrast, significantly worse performance (p < 0.05) was observed after SS as compared with that after CC in 5JT, and sprint times for 10, 20, and 30 m. With RSA, no significant difference was observed between different stretching protocols in the total time (F = 1.55, p > 0.05), average time (F = 1.53, p > 0.05), and fastest time (F = 2.30, p > 0.05), except for the decline index (F = 3.54, p < 0.04, ES = 0.19). Therefore, the SS of the lower limbs and hip muscles had a negative effect on explosive performances up to 24 hours poststretching with no major effects on the RSA. Conversely, the DS of the same muscle groups are highly recommended 24 hours before performing sprint and long-jump performances. In conclusion, the positive effects of DS on explosive performances seem to persist for 24 hours.
本研究的目的是比较静态拉伸与动态拉伸(DS)对24小时延迟后的爆发力表现和重复冲刺能力(RSA)的影响。16名年轻男性足球运动员在进行爆发力表现和RSA测试前24小时,分别进行了15分钟的静态拉伸(SS)、DS或无拉伸对照(CC)。这是一项受试者内重复测量研究,对SS、DS和CC进行了平衡处理。拉伸方案包括对5个肌肉群(股四头肌、腘绳肌、小腿肌、内收肌和髋屈肌)进行2组,每组7分30秒(30秒重复2次,中间有15秒被动恢复)。24小时后(热身时不进行任何形式的拉伸),对运动员进行30米冲刺测试(记录10米和20米圈时)、5跳测试(5JT)和RSA测试。在5JT、10米冲刺时间(F = 46.52,p < 0.00,效应量[ES] = 0.76)、20米冲刺时间(F = 18.44,p < 0.000,ES = 0.55)和30米冲刺时间(F = 34.25,p < 0.000,ES = 0.70)方面,CC、SS和DS之间观察到显著差异。与CC和SS相比,DS后在50在5JT以及10米、20米和30米冲刺时间方面表现明显更好(p < 0.05)。相反,与CC相比,SS在5JT以及10米、20米和30米冲刺时间方面表现明显更差(p < 0.05)。对于RSA,除了下降指数(F = 3.54,p < 0.04,ES = 0.19)外,不同拉伸方案在总时间(F = 1.55,p > 0.05)、平均时间(F = 1.53,p > 0.05)和最快时间(F = 2.30,p > 0.05)上没有观察到显著差异。因此,下肢和髋部肌肉的SS在拉伸后长达24小时对爆发力表现有负面影响,对RSA没有重大影响。相反,在进行冲刺和跳远表现前24小时,强烈推荐对相同肌肉群进行DS。总之,DS对爆发力表现的积极影响似乎持续24小时。