Acute Effects Of Short-Term Static, Active Isolated, And Dynamic Stretching Protocols On Explosive Power and Hamstring Flexibility in Active Males

Acute Effects Of Short-Term Static, Active Isolated, And Dynamic Stretching Protocols On Explosive Power and Hamstring Flexibility in Active Males | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Acute Effects Of Short-Term Static, Active Isolated, And Dynamic Stretching Protocols On Explosive Power and Hamstring Flexibility in Active Males MUSTAFA SAVASAN, YELIZ PINAR, EGEMEN ALP, SALIH PINAR This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-8987549/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Under Revision Version 1 posted 10 You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Stretching is commonly used in warm-up routines, yet evidence regarding its acute effects on flexibility and explosive performance remains mixed, particularly when considering technique, duration, and tempo. This study compared the immediate and short-term effects of static stretching (SS), active isolated stretching (AIS), and dynamic stretching (DS) protocols with different tempos and durations on hamstring flexibility and countermovement jump (CMJ) performance in active males. Thirty healthy, physically active men (22–25 years; body mass index (BMI) < 30 kg·m⁻²), each with at least two years of resistance-training experience, completed a randomized cross-over design involving six stretching conditions: SS (30-s passive stretch), AIS (30-s total active contractions), and four DS variations combining tempo (100 or 150 beats/min) and duration (30 or 75s): DS100/30, DS150/30, DS100/75, and DS150/75. Hamstring flexibility was assessed using the Passive Straight-Leg Raise test, and CMJ height and power were measured using a Swift Performance Speed Mat. Measurements were obtained before stretching and immediately, 5 minutes, and 10 minutes afterward. Repeated-measures ANOVA and paired t-tests were used (p < .05). All stretching protocols significantly improved flexibility (p < .05), with the greatest improvements following DS150/30 and AIS. CMJ height and power increased at all post-stretch time points for DS150/30, AIS, and DS100/30 (p < .05), whereas longer DS durations (75 s) did not enhance performance. Short-duration, high-tempo dynamic stretching (150 bpm, 30 s) produced the most effective acute improvements in flexibility and explosive power. These findings emphasize the importance of stretch duration and tempo when designing warm-up routines. Dynamic stretching active isolated stretching static stretching countermovement jump flexibility explosive performance Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Introduction One of the most important and essential elements of athletic warm-up regimens that improve performance and flexibility is stretching ( 1 ). The relationship between various stretching modalities and their influence on physical capabilities, particularly explosive power, remains a topic of ongoing investigation and debate ( 2 ). Stretching can be categorized in different formats, static stretching (SS), active isolated stretching (AIS) and dynamic stretching (DS), the later as well as AIS is said to confer its own advantages with specific patterns of use and accompanying mechanisms ( 2 ). Due to methodological differences in stretching duration, intensity, muscle group selection, and inclusion in full warm-up routines, results regarding the acute effects of stretching on performance remain inconsistent and sometimes contradictory despite decades of research ( 3 – 5 ). This inconsistency highlights the need for additional standardized studies evaluating various stretching techniques in similar experimental settings. SS, which involves holding a muscle in a lengthened position for a specific period of time, has been extensively studied within the context of sports performance. While traditionally used to improve flexibility, prolonged static stretching (> 60 s) has been associated with temporary reductions in explosive performance metrics such as CMJ height ( 4 , 6 ). Conversely, short-duration SS (≤ 30 s) appears to produce negligible decrements and may therefore be incorporated into warm-up routines without impairing subsequent performance ( 7 ). Recent systematic reviews have further demonstrated that brief static stretches (30–60 s per muscle group), when integrated into a complete warm-up routine involving aerobic and dynamic activities, do not meaningfully impair strength or jump performance ( 4 , 5 ). Therefore, the frequently mentioned disadvantages of static stretching can be exaggerated, especially when done at the right time and for a short period. Meanwhile, AIS has attracted increasing interest for its unique contraction–relaxation erntechnique, which may enhance range of motion (ROM) without the potential inhibitory effects sometimes observed with static stretching ( 8 ). Emerging evidence also suggests that AIS may help maintain or even enhance explosive performance when integrated into warm-up routines ( 8 ). However, studies examining its acute effects on athletic performance remain scarce and inconsistent. For instance, Waqqash et al. ( 9 ) reported reductions in jump performance following AIS protocols exceeding 60 seconds in total duration. Such findings suggest that total stretch duration may be a critical factor. In order to bridge this gap, the present study standardized AIS duration to 30 seconds to ensure comparability with short SS protocols and to isolate the potential influence of AIS on explosive performance. Furthermore, DS has gained substantial support as a superior approach for enhancing both flexibility and performance ( 2 , 10 ). DS is characterized by continuous movements that actively engage muscles through sport-specific ranges of motion, DS increases muscle temperature, neural activation, and potentiation of the stretch-shortening cycle (SSC) prior to explosive activity ( 10 , 11 ). However, the literature shows considerable variability, particularly in DS protocol design regarding tempo and application time, with few studies explicitly controlling these factors. Fletcher demonstrated that DS performed at 100 beats per minute (bpm) significantly improved CMJ and drop-jump performance compared with 50 bpm, highlighting movement tempo as an important yet underexplored determinant of effectiveness ( 12 ). Accordingly, the present study incorporates DS protocols performed at two controlled tempos (100 and 150 bpm) and two durations (30 and 75 s) to systematically evaluate their combined effects on flexibility and explosive power. In addition, few studies have examined how long any performance effects of stretching persist after completion. To explore potential time-dependent recovery or potentiation, this study assessed CMJ performance immediately after, and at 5- and 10-minutes post-stretching, following the methodological rationale of Torres et al. ( 13 ) and the time-course observations reported by Konrad and Tilp ( 14 ). The hamstring muscle group was chosen as the reference muscle because of its importance for lower-limb power generation, and well-documented relationships with flexibility deficits, injury risk, and decreases in muscular performance ( 15 , 16 ). This emphasis carries great applied importance for athletes involved in sprinting and jumping sports. Therefore, strength and conditioning coaches need clear proof on whether stretching modality, duration, and movement tempo might boost explosive performance without reducing power output during warm-ups before training or competition. To the best of our knowledge, no previous study has simultaneously compared SS, AIS, and multiple DS protocols differing in both tempo and stretch-bout duration while also examining time-dependent changes in performance. Therefore, this study was designed to address these gaps. Based on the evidence summarized above, it was hypothesized that (i) dynamic stretching, particularly the short-duration high-tempo protocol (DS150/30), would lead to the greatest acute improvement in countermovement jump performance compared with SS and AIS, and (ii) all stretching techniques would enhance hamstring flexibility, with AIS and short-duration dynamic stretching expected to produce the most pronounced gains. Methods Experimental Approach to the Problem This study employed a randomized, counterbalanced, within-subject crossover design to examine the acute effects of different stretching modalities on hamstring flexibility and explosive performance. Each participant completed seven experimental sessions (six stretching conditions and one control condition) separated by at least 72 hours to minimize residual fatigue and carryover effects (Fig. 1 ). The independent variables were stretching modality (static stretching, active isolated stretching, dynamic stretching), movement tempo (100 vs. 150 beats·min⁻¹), and stretch duration (30 vs. 75 s). The dependent variables were hamstring ROM assessed via passive straight-leg raise and CMJ height and power output. This design allowed direct comparison of modality-, tempo-, and duration-specific effects to test the hypothesis that short-duration, high-tempo dynamic stretching would produce superior acute improvements in explosive performance. Subjects A total of 30 healthy, recreationally active male participants volunteered for this study. Their mean ± SD characteristics were as follows: age = 23.60 ± 0.40 years; height = 178.02 ± 8.02 cm; body mass = 76.24 ± 7.24 kg; and BMI = 23.23 ± 2.23 kg·m⁻². All participants had been engaging in regular exercise for at least two years and had a BMI below 30 kg·m⁻². Participants were classified as low-risk according to Physical Activity Readiness Questionnaire (PAR-Q+) and the American College of Sports Medicine health risk stratification guidelines. All individuals provided written informed consent prior to participation. ( 17 , 18 ) The study was approved by the Marmara University Faculty of Medicine Clinical Research Ethics Committee (Approval date and number: 02 April 2021 / 09.2021.283) and all procedures were conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. An a priori power analysis was conducted based on variance estimates reported in similar repeated-measures ANOVA studies ( 19 , 20 ). Assuming a repeated-measures design (within factors), a statistical power of 0.95 and an alpha level of 0.05, the required sample size was calculated as 25 participants. To account for potential dropouts and ensure adequate statistical power, 30 recreationally active males were ultimately recruited for the study. Procedures All sessions were implemented at the same time of day under controlled environmental conditions to minimize circadian rhythm and environmental influences on performance and flexibility outcomes. Participants were instructed to maintain consistent dietary habits, avoid caffeine, alcohol, and strenuous exercise for at least 24 hours prior to testing, and ensure adequate sleep. Warm-up and Testing Sequence The experimental protocol consisted of seven sequential phases, as illustrated in Fig. 1 . Each participant performed the procedures in the same order and under identical environmental conditions to ensure consistency. Stretching Protocols : Seven stretching conditions were applied in randomized order: a control condition (CON), SS, AIS, and four DS variations differing in duration and tempo (Table 1 ). All stretching techniques targeted the hamstring muscle group. The SS protocol was performed in the supine position; with the pelvis stabilized and the opposite leg extended on the floor, the investigator passively raised the test leg into hip flexion with the knee fully extended until the participant reached the point of mild discomfort, and this position was maintained for 30 seconds before switching sides (Fig. 2 A). Following this, the AIS protocol followed the standard contraction–relaxation sequence: participants lay supine and actively lifted the test leg into hip flexion, briefly holding the terminal position for 2 seconds before returning to the starting position; this sequence was repeated 15 times per leg and the three-step AIS sequence is shown in Fig. 2B1-B3. Table 1 Description of the seven stretching protocols applied in random order. Protocol Description CON No stretching SS 30 s per leg, static stretching in the supine position AIS 15 repetitions per leg, each with a 2 s active contraction DG30/100 Dynamic stretching for 30 s at 100 bpm DG30/150 Dynamic stretching for 30 s at 150 bpm DG75/100 Dynamic stretching for 75 s at 100 bpm DG75/150 Dynamic stretching for 75 s at 150 bpm Table note CON = Control; SS = Static Stretching; AIS = Active Isolated Stretching; DG30/100 = Dynamic Stretching for 30 s at 100 bpm; DG30/150 = Dynamic Stretching for 30 s at 150 bpm; DG75/100 = Dynamic Stretching for 75 s at 100 bpm; DG75/150 = Dynamic Stretching for 75 s at 150 bpm. The DS protocols consisted of rhythmic forward straight-leg swings performed through each participant’s active range of motion while maintaining full knee extension as depicted in Fig. 2 C. Four DS variations were implemented to systematically manipulate tempo and duration: 30 seconds at 100 beats/min (DG30/100), 30 seconds at 150 beats/min (DG30/150), 75 seconds at 100 beats/min (DG75/100), and 75 seconds at 150 beats/min (DG75/150). Movement tempo was precisely controlled using a Musedo MT-40 digital metronome (± 0.3% accuracy). Hamstring flexibility was assessed using the passive straight-leg raise (PSLR) test with a Baseline 360° goniometer following standardized procedures ( 21 ). The axis was aligned over the greater trochanter, the stationary arm with the mid-axillary line of the trunk, and the movable arm with the lateral femoral epicondyle. All flexibility assessments were conducted by the same investigator to ensure measurement consistency. CMJ height and power output were recorded using a Swift Performance Speed Mat 260 (Swift Performance, Brisbane, Australia), which derives jump metrics from flight time ( 22 ). Participants performed three maximal CMJs with hands on hips, separated by ~ 10 seconds, and the highest value was used for analysis. No rest, stretching, or additional movements were permitted between attempts (Fig. 2 ). The Perceived Recovery Status scale ( 23 ) was administered immediately before each CMJ test to quantify subjective readiness. Post-stretch assessments of PSLR and CMJ were obtained immediately, and again at 5 and 10 minutes following each intervention, in accordance with procedures commonly used to evaluate short-term potentiation and recovery responses ( 13 , 14 ). Statistical Analysis All analyses were conducted using IBM SPSS Statistics version 24. Data normality was tested using the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test, along with Skewness and Kurtosis indices. Descriptive statistics (mean: ± SD) were computed for all variables. The effects of stretching type and time were examined via two-way repeated-measures ANOVA (protocol × time). When significant effects were detected, paired-samples t-tests and Tukey HSD post hoc tests were performed. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05. Results All 30 participants completed all experimental sessions and were included in the final analyses. No participants were excluded or lost to follow-up after randomization. The immediate post-stretching assessments indicated that all stretching protocols produced statistically significant improvements in hamstring ROM compared to baseline measurements (p < 0.05). Among the various protocols, AIS yielded a 5.55% improvement, whereas SS resulted in a more modest 3.22% increase. When considering the dynamic stretching protocols, DS 150/30 elicited the greatest enhancement, with a 7.35% increase in flexibility. DS 100/30 also produced a significant but smaller improvement of 4.34%. Notably, the longer-duration dynamic stretching protocols (DS 100/75 and DS 150/75) enhanced flexibility by 6.56% and 6.67%, respectively; however, these longer durations demonstrated diminishing returns compared to their shorter-duration counterparts. Performance Outcomes In the realm of performance, CMJ metrics revealed the most substantial enhancements with the DS 150/30 protocol, resulting in an impressive increase of 11.39% in jump height and a 7.93% increase in mean power output. AIS also demonstrated notable efficacy with a 7.61% increase in jump height and a corresponding 4.81% increase in mean power output. Conversely, the DS 100/30 protocol provided a modest improvement of 1.81% in jump height and 1.26% in mean power output. Interestingly, extending the duration of the dynamic stretching exercises led to a decline in performance outcomes, as indicated by the DS 100/75 and DS 150/75 protocols, which resulted in decreases of − 0.20% and − 1.43% in jump height, and declines of − 0.25% and − 1.12% in mean power output, respectively. A comprehensive summary of these results is provided in Tables 2 and 3 . Table 2 Changes in Flexibility and CMJ Performance (Pre vs. Post-Test) Protocol Flexibility % CMJ % Mean Power % Peak Power % SS + 3.22 + 0.77 + 0.72 + 0.20 AIS + 5.55 + 7.61 + 4.81 + 2.19 DS 100/30 + 4.34 + 1.81 + 1.26 + 0.58 DS 150/30 + 7.35 + 11.39 + 7.93 + 3.34 DS 100/75 + 6.56 −0.20 −0.25 −0.08 DS 150/75 + 6.67 −1.43 −1.12 −0.46 SS = Static Stretching; AIS = Active Isolated Stretching; DG30/100 = Dynamic Stretching for 30 s at 100 bpm; DG30/150 = Dynamic Stretching for 30 s at 150 bpm; DG75/100 = Dynamic Stretching for 75 s at 100 bpm; DG75/150 = Dynamic Stretching for 75 s at 150 bpm. Table 3 CMJ Performance at 5th and 10th min. Post-Stretching Protocol % (5th min.) % (10th min.) SS + 1.51% + 1.09% AIS + 8.77% + 4.80% DS 100/30 + 4.02% + 4.06% DS 150/30 + 12.21% + 13.17% DS 100/75 + 1.30% + 1.40% DS 150/75 −0.49% + 1.201% SS = Static Stretching; AIS = Active Isolated Stretching; DG30/100 = Dynamic Stretching for 30 s at 100 bpm; DG30/150 = Dynamic Stretching for 30 s at 150 bpm; DG75/100 = Dynamic Stretching for 75 s at 100 bpm; DG75/150 = Dynamic Stretching for 75 s at 150 bpm. Discussion This crossover study demonstrates that brief, high-tempo dynamic stretching (DS 150/30) elicited the most pronounced acute improvements in explosive performance among the tested conditions. Specifically, CMJ height and power output increased by approximately 7–8% compared to the CON, while AIS produced smaller but meaningful enhancements of around 4–5%. In contrast, long-duration dynamic stretching protocols (75 seconds) resulted in trivial or slightly negative changes in CMJ metrics, suggesting that both tempo and duration are critical determinants of acute neuromuscular readiness. All stretching protocols significantly improved hamstring flexibility, with the largest increase observed following DS 150/30 and AIS. These findings align with previous meta-analytic and experimental evidence indicating that short-duration static stretching (< 60 s per muscle) produces negligible or trivial reductions in maximal strength and power, whereas longer durations impair explosive performance. ( 4 , 24 , 25 ) Similarly, dynamic stretching is generally advantageous or at least not detrimental when performed before activities requiring maximal effort ( 2 , 26 , 27 ). The present findings further emphasize that the tempo of dynamic stretching is a determinative factor in identifying its acute outcomes. In support of this notion, Paradisis et al. ( 28 ) demonstrated that faster, rhythmically controlled dynamic movements enhance jump performance more effectively than slower movements. This pattern is consistent with our data, in which a tempo of 150 bpm produced superior CMJ outcomes compared with 100 bpm and longer stretching durations. The effects of AIS observed in the present study contribute to clarifying the conflicting evidence in the literature. Prior studies have reported that AIS lasting longer than 60 seconds per muscle may lead to performance declines ( 8 ). In contrast, our 30-second AIS protocol improved CMJ height and power, suggesting that the acute effects of AIS follow a time-dependent pattern similar to that observed for static stretching. This supports the hypothesis that AIS, when performed briefly, may enhance range of motion without inducing the neural inhibition or musculotendinous relaxation commonly seen after prolonged stretching. The superior acute responses to AIS in the present study may also be explained by its unique physiological mechanisms. Unlike static stretching, AIS involves repetitive isotonic contractions that enhance local blood flow, oxygenation, and nutrient exchange, thereby improving tissue elasticity and neuromuscular efficiency ( 2 , 5 ). These active contractions may facilitate reciprocal inhibition of antagonist muscles, promoting safer and more specific elongation of the targeted muscle groups. Furthermore, the brief stretch duration (~ 2 s per repetition) prevents excessive muscle spindle activation and minimizes the stretch reflex, maintaining muscle excitability and power output. Controlled breathing during AIS may further reduce fatigue by limiting lactate accumulation and promoting parasympathetic activation, ultimately contributing to the enhanced flexibility and explosive performance observed in the current study ( 14 ). The superior performance observed following DS 150/30 likely reflects a combination of neural and mechanical mechanisms. Rapid, brief dynamic movements enhance muscle temperature, elevate motoneuron excitability, and improve synchronization of motor unit recruitment. They may also potentiate the stretch-shortening cycle (SSC) by increasing elastic energy storage and neural facilitation, mechanisms consistent with post-activation performance enhancement ( 29 ). Conversely, extended or low-tempo dynamic stretching may elevate metabolic cost, reduce musculotendinous stiffness, and cause viscoelastic creep, thereby impairing power output and delaying the rate of force development. The temporal analysis across the 1-, 5-, and 10-minute post-stretching intervals revealed that the performance enhancements induced by DS 150/30 persisted for at least 10 minutes. This time course supports the functional window of potentiation described in previous studies ( 13 , 14 ). Such persistence underscores the practical relevance of high-tempo dynamic stretching, which appears to sustain explosive readiness during the transition from warm-up to performance. In contrast, the performance decrements following long-duration dynamic stretching likely reflect transient reductions in stiffness and decreased neural activation, possibly due to excessive musculotendinous relaxation. From a practical standpoint, these results suggest that pre-performance warm-ups should incorporate brief (~ 30 s) high-tempo (~ 150 bpm) dynamic stretching targeting the primary muscles engaged in explosive movements. When dynamic stretching is not feasible, short-duration AIS (~ 30 s) may serve as an effective alternative without compromising performance. However, long-duration dynamic stretching (≥ 75 s) should be avoided immediately prior to maximal efforts, as it may reduce jump height and power output. To optimize benefits, warm-ups should be completed within approximately 10 minutes before competition to capitalize on the temporal window of potentiation observed in this study. The main advantages of this study are the within-subject comparisons, standardized testing conditions, and randomized crossover design with 72-hour intervals, which reduced interindividual variability. Internal validity was enhanced by the use of proven measurement tools in uniform environmental conditions for all flexibility and performance assessments. However, several limitations should be considered. Because the participant sample was limited to young, recreationally active males, generalization to females, older adults, or elite athletes is limited. Furthermore, the complexity of sport-specific explosive movements may not be fully captured by CMJ assessment in a controlled laboratory setting, limiting ecological validity. Future studies should assess individual variability between responders and non-responders, measure changes in muscle-tendon properties in relation to performance indicators and examine chronic adaptations resulting from repeated exposure to different stretching procedures. In conclusion, the present findings demonstrate that the short-duration high-tempo dynamic stretching protocol (DS150/30) produced the most substantial acute enhancement in explosive performance, increasing CMJ height and power by approximately 7–8% compared with the CON. AIS elicited moderate but positive effects, whereas long-duration dynamic stretching (≥ 75 s) failed to improve or slightly reduced CMJ performance. These results confirm that stretch duration and movement tempo are critical determinants of neuromuscular readiness and explosive performance. Additionally, all stretching techniques improved hamstring flexibility, with AIS and short-duration dynamic stretching producing the largest gains. Overall, implementing DS150/30 during the final minutes of a warm-up may effectively enhance acute power output while avoiding the potential performance-reducing effects associated with longer stretching durations. Practical Applications Strength and conditioning practitioners should incorporate brief, high-tempo dynamic stretching (~ 30 s at ~ 150 beats·min⁻¹) during the final phase of warm-up routines when explosive performance is required. This approach enhances jump performance and flexibility without reducing power output. Prolonged dynamic stretching (≥ 75 s per muscle group) should be avoided immediately before maximal efforts, as it may attenuate explosive performance. When dynamic stretching is not feasible, short-duration active isolated stretching (~ 30 s total) can be used to improve range of motion without compromising neuromuscular readiness. To maximize potentiation effects, explosive activities should be performed within approximately 10 minutes after completing the warm-up. Abbreviations AIS Active Isolated Stretching BMI Body Mass Index CMJ Countermovement Jump CON Control Condition DS Dynamic Stretching PAR-Q+ Physical Activity Readiness Questionnaire for Everyone PSLR Passive Straight-Leg Raise ROM Range of Motion SSC Stretch–Shortening Cycle SS Static Stretching Declarations Ethics approval and consent to participate The study was approved by the Marmara University Faculty of Medicine Clinical Research Ethics Committee (Approval date and number: 02 April 2021 / 09.2021.283). All participants provided written informed consent prior to participation. All procedures were conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. Consent for publication Written informed consent for publication of the participant’s images was obtained. Availability of data and materials The datasets generated and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author (Yeliz Pınar) upon reasonable request. Competing interests The authors declare that they have no competing interests. Funding This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors. Authors’ contributions MS, YP, EA, and SP contributed to the conceptualization of the study. YP developed the methodology. MS and YP were responsible for software. EA and SP conducted the formal analysis. SP and MS carried out the investigation. MS, EA, and SP curated the data. EA performed the visualization. YP was responsible for supervision and validation. YP and SB managed project administration. EA, YP, MS, and SP wrote the original draft. SP, EA, MS, and YP reviewed and edited the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final version of the manuscript. Acknowledgements This study is based on the doctoral thesis of the first author, completed under the supervision of Prof. Dr. Yeliz Pınar in the Department of Movement and Training Sciences at Marmara University, Institute of Health Sciences, Istanbul, Türkiye. References Behm DG, Alizadeh S, Daneshjoo A, et al. Acute effects of various stretching techniques on range of motion: A systematic review with meta-analysis. Sports Med Open. 2023;9:107. Behm DG, Chaouachi A. A review of the acute effects of static and dynamic stretching on performance. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2011;111:2633–51. Shrier I. Does stretching improve performance? A systematic and critical review of the literature. Clin J Sport Med. 2004;14:267–73. Kay AD, Blazevich AJ. Effect of acute static stretch on maximal muscle performance: A systematic review. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2012;44:154–64. Behm DG, Blazevich AJ, Kay AD, et al. Acute effects of muscle stretching on physical performance, range of motion, and injury incidence in healthy active individuals: A systematic review. Appl Physiol Nutr Metab. 2015;41:1–11. Simic L, Sarabon N, Markovic G. Does pre-exercise static stretching inhibit maximal muscular performance? A meta-analytical review. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2013;23:131–48. Buttifant D, Hrysomallis C. Effect of various practical warm-up protocols on acute lower-body power. J Strength Cond Res. 2015;29:656–60. Vernetta-Santana M, Ariza-Vargas L, Robles-Fuentes A, et al. Acute effect of active isolated stretching technique on range of motion and peak isometric force. J Sports Med Phys Fit. 2015;55:1253–61. Waqqash E, Osman N, Nadzalan AM, et al. Acute effects of active isolated stretching on vertical jump performance in active university students. J Fundam Appl Sci. 2018;9:1063–70. Yamaguchi T, Ishii K. Effects of static stretching for 30 seconds and dynamic stretching on leg extension power. J Strength Cond Res. 2005;19:677–83. Fletcher IM, Jones B. The effect of different warm-up stretch protocols on 20-meter sprint performance in trained rugby union players. J Strength Cond Res. 2004;18:885–8. Fletcher IM. The effect of different dynamic stretch velocities on jump performance. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2010;109:491–8. Torres EM, Kraemer WJ, Vingren JL, et al. Effects of stretching on upper-body muscular performance. J Strength Cond Res. 2008;22:1270–7. Konrad A, Tilp M. Time course of muscle-tendon unit function following three minutes of static stretching. J Sports Sci Med. 2014;13:642–8. Croisier JL, Ganteaume S, Binet J, et al. Strength imbalances and prevention of hamstring injury in professional soccer players: A prospective study. Am J Sports Med. 2008;36:1469–75. Witvrouw E, Danneels L, Asselman P, et al. Muscle flexibility as a risk factor for developing muscle injuries in male professional soccer players: A prospective study. Am J Sports Med. 2003;31:41–6. Warburton DER, Jamnik VK, Bredin SSD, et al. The physical activity readiness questionnaire for everyone (PAR-Q+) and the ePARmed-X+. Health Fit J Can. 2011;4:3–17. American College of Sports Medicine. ACSM’s guidelines for exercise testing and prescription. Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer; 2021. Manoel ME, Harris-Love MO, Danoff JV, et al. Acute effects of static, dynamic, and proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation stretching on muscle power in women. J Strength Cond Res. 2008;22:1528–34. Perrier ET, Pavol MJ, Hoffman MA. The acute effects of a warm-up including static or dynamic stretching on countermovement jump height, reaction time, and flexibility. J Strength Cond Res. 2011;25:1925–31. Norkin CC, White DJ. Measurement of joint motion: A guide to goniometry. Philadelphia: FA Davis; 2016. Sayers SP, Harackiewicz DV, Harman EA, et al. Cross-validation of three jump power equations. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1999;31:572–7. Laurent CM, Green JM, Bishop PA, et al. A practical approach to monitoring recovery: Development of a perceived recovery status scale. J Strength Cond Res. 2011;25:620–8. Ji S, Lu H, Sun Z, et al. Acute effects of prolonged durations of static stretching on athletic performance and flexibility. Res Sports Med. 2025;33:000–000. Behm DG. The science and physiology of flexibility and stretching. 2nd ed. London: Routledge; 2024. Zois J, Bishop DJ, Ball K, et al. High-intensity warm-ups elicit superior performance to a current soccer warm-up routine. J Sci Med Sport. 2011;14:522–8. Savaşan M, Pınar Y, Pınar S. Acute effects of various dynamic stretching exercises on jump performance and range of motion. Sport TK. 2025;14:000–000. Paradisis GP, Pappas PT, Theodorou AS, et al. Effects of static and dynamic stretching on sprint and jump performance in boys and girls. J Strength Cond Res. 2014;28:154–60. Blazevich AJ, Babault N. Post-activation potentiation versus post-activation performance enhancement in humans: Mechanisms and current issues. Front Physiol. 2019;10:1359. Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Under Revision Version 1 posted Editorial decision: Revision requested 27 Apr, 2026 Reviews received at journal 24 Apr, 2026 Reviews received at journal 08 Apr, 2026 Reviewers agreed at journal 03 Apr, 2026 Reviewers agreed at journal 03 Apr, 2026 Reviewers invited by journal 01 Apr, 2026 Editor assigned by journal 01 Apr, 2026 Editor invited by journal 31 Mar, 2026 Submission checks completed at journal 30 Mar, 2026 First submitted to journal 30 Mar, 2026 You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-8987549","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":617657823,"identity":"81a0264d-28ee-408f-a30a-bace2ef7fb8d","order_by":0,"name":"MUSTAFA SAVASAN","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Marmara University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"MUSTAFA","middleName":"","lastName":"SAVASAN","suffix":""},{"id":617657824,"identity":"f5589966-386b-4bb3-90ee-5fd686b24250","order_by":1,"name":"YELIZ PINAR","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Marmara University","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"YELIZ","middleName":"","lastName":"PINAR","suffix":""},{"id":617657825,"identity":"97e76a7a-f946-4a79-b52e-f28108c67e32","order_by":2,"name":"EGEMEN ALP","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Fenerbahçe University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"EGEMEN","middleName":"","lastName":"ALP","suffix":""},{"id":617657826,"identity":"7180a828-faee-46a2-b09d-03912a563015","order_by":3,"name":"SALIH PINAR","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Gedik University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"SALIH","middleName":"","lastName":"PINAR","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2026-02-27 11:38:31","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-8987549/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-8987549/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":106253335,"identity":"67ca2b1e-7eab-4efe-85e6-992f9b30293f","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-04-06 17:55:15","extension":"jpg","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":103537,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eWarm-up and testing sequence followed during each experimental session. Flowchart of the experimental protocol showing warm-up, baseline testing, stretching interventions, and post-stretch assessments. CMJ = countermovement jump; ROM = range of motion.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"1.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8987549/v1/9ab0744d36af5d55c3829a42.jpg"},{"id":106253334,"identity":"4b558455-af8a-46ad-b985-b33768188af0","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-04-06 17:55:15","extension":"jpg","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":46572,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eDemonstration of the stretching procedures applied in the study. (A) Static stretching (SS): Passive hip-flexion stretch performed in the supine position with the knee fully extended. (B1) AIS starting position; (B2) AIS active contraction position; (B3) AIS end-range stretch position. (C) Dynamic stretching (DS): Forward straight-leg swing performed through the active range of motion with tempo controlled by a digital metronome.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"2.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8987549/v1/0ae6f143d46546f763d602f7.jpg"},{"id":106253340,"identity":"796b705d-b13b-4bcd-af79-322a9affe9f2","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-04-06 17:55:19","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":765690,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8987549/v1/e60c37d6-f19a-4d35-83f3-66490e652b85.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Acute Effects Of Short-Term Static, Active Isolated, And Dynamic Stretching Protocols On Explosive Power and Hamstring Flexibility in Active Males","fulltext":[{"header":"Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eOne of the most important and essential elements of athletic warm-up regimens that improve performance and flexibility is stretching (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e). The relationship between various stretching modalities and their influence on physical capabilities, particularly explosive power, remains a topic of ongoing investigation and debate (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e). Stretching can be categorized in different formats, static stretching (SS), active isolated stretching (AIS) and dynamic stretching (DS), the later as well as AIS is said to confer its own advantages with specific patterns of use and accompanying mechanisms (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eDue to methodological differences in stretching duration, intensity, muscle group selection, and inclusion in full warm-up routines, results regarding the acute effects of stretching on performance remain inconsistent and sometimes contradictory despite decades of research (\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR4\" citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e). This inconsistency highlights the need for additional standardized studies evaluating various stretching techniques in similar experimental settings. SS, which involves holding a muscle in a lengthened position for a specific period of time, has been extensively studied within the context of sports performance. While traditionally used to improve flexibility, prolonged static stretching (\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;60 s) has been associated with temporary reductions in explosive performance metrics such as CMJ height (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e). Conversely, short-duration SS (\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;30 s) appears to produce negligible decrements and may therefore be incorporated into warm-up routines without impairing subsequent performance (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e). Recent systematic reviews have further demonstrated that brief static stretches (30\u0026ndash;60 s per muscle group), when integrated into a complete warm-up routine involving aerobic and dynamic activities, do not meaningfully impair strength or jump performance (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e). Therefore, the frequently mentioned disadvantages of static stretching can be exaggerated, especially when done at the right time and for a short period.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eMeanwhile, AIS has attracted increasing interest for its unique contraction\u0026ndash;relaxation erntechnique, which may enhance range of motion (ROM) without the potential inhibitory effects sometimes observed with static stretching (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e). Emerging evidence also suggests that AIS may help maintain or even enhance explosive performance when integrated into warm-up routines (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e). However, studies examining its acute effects on athletic performance remain scarce and inconsistent. For instance, Waqqash et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e) reported reductions in jump performance following AIS protocols exceeding 60 seconds in total duration. Such findings suggest that total stretch duration may be a critical factor. In order to bridge this gap, the present study standardized AIS duration to 30 seconds to ensure comparability with short SS protocols and to isolate the potential influence of AIS on explosive performance.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFurthermore, DS has gained substantial support as a superior approach for enhancing both flexibility and performance (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003e). DS is characterized by continuous movements that actively engage muscles through sport-specific ranges of motion, DS increases muscle temperature, neural activation, and potentiation of the stretch-shortening cycle (SSC) prior to explosive activity (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e11\u003c/span\u003e). However, the literature shows considerable variability, particularly in DS protocol design regarding tempo and application time, with few studies explicitly controlling these factors. Fletcher demonstrated that DS performed at 100 beats per minute (bpm) significantly improved CMJ and drop-jump performance compared with 50 bpm, highlighting movement tempo as an important yet underexplored determinant of effectiveness (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e12\u003c/span\u003e). Accordingly, the present study incorporates DS protocols performed at two controlled tempos (100 and 150 bpm) and two durations (30 and 75 s) to systematically evaluate their combined effects on flexibility and explosive power.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn addition, few studies have examined how long any performance effects of stretching persist after completion. To explore potential time-dependent recovery or potentiation, this study assessed CMJ performance immediately after, and at 5- and 10-minutes post-stretching, following the methodological rationale of Torres et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e) and the time-course observations reported by Konrad and Tilp (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe hamstring muscle group was chosen as the reference muscle because of its importance for lower-limb power generation, and well-documented relationships with flexibility deficits, injury risk, and decreases in muscular performance (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e15\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e16\u003c/span\u003e). This emphasis carries great applied importance for athletes involved in sprinting and jumping sports. Therefore, strength and conditioning coaches need clear proof on whether stretching modality, duration, and movement tempo might boost explosive performance without reducing power output during warm-ups before training or competition.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo the best of our knowledge, no previous study has simultaneously compared SS, AIS, and multiple DS protocols differing in both tempo and stretch-bout duration while also examining time-dependent changes in performance. Therefore, this study was designed to address these gaps. Based on the evidence summarized above, it was hypothesized that (i) dynamic stretching, particularly the short-duration high-tempo protocol (DS150/30), would lead to the greatest acute improvement in countermovement jump performance compared with SS and AIS, and (ii) all stretching techniques would enhance hamstring flexibility, with AIS and short-duration dynamic stretching expected to produce the most pronounced gains.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Methods","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eExperimental Approach to the Problem\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis study employed a randomized, counterbalanced, within-subject crossover design to examine the acute effects of different stretching modalities on hamstring flexibility and explosive performance. Each participant completed seven experimental sessions (six stretching conditions and one control condition) separated by at least 72 hours to minimize residual fatigue and carryover effects (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e). The independent variables were stretching modality (static stretching, active isolated stretching, dynamic stretching), movement tempo (100 vs. 150 beats\u0026middot;min⁻\u0026sup1;), and stretch duration (30 vs. 75 s). The dependent variables were hamstring ROM assessed via passive straight-leg raise and CMJ height and power output. This design allowed direct comparison of modality-, tempo-, and duration-specific effects to test the hypothesis that short-duration, high-tempo dynamic stretching would produce superior acute improvements in explosive performance.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eSubjects\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eA total of 30 healthy, recreationally active male participants volunteered for this study. Their mean\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;SD characteristics were as follows: age\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;23.60\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.40 years; height\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;178.02\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;8.02 cm; body mass\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;76.24\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;7.24 kg; and BMI\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;23.23\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;2.23 kg\u0026middot;m⁻\u0026sup2;. All participants had been engaging in regular exercise for at least two years and had a BMI below 30 kg\u0026middot;m⁻\u0026sup2;. Participants were classified as low-risk according to Physical Activity Readiness Questionnaire (PAR-Q+) and the American College of Sports Medicine health risk stratification guidelines. All individuals provided written informed consent prior to participation. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e17\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e18\u003c/span\u003e) The study was approved by the \u003cb\u003eMarmara University Faculty of Medicine Clinical Research Ethics Committee (Approval date and number: 02 April 2021 / 09.2021.283)\u003c/b\u003e and all procedures were conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAn a priori power analysis was conducted based on variance estimates reported in similar repeated-measures ANOVA studies (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e20\u003c/span\u003e). Assuming a repeated-measures design (within factors), a statistical power of 0.95 and an alpha level of 0.05, the required sample size was calculated as 25 participants. To account for potential dropouts and ensure adequate statistical power, 30 recreationally active males were ultimately recruited for the study.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eProcedures\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAll sessions were implemented at the same time of day under controlled environmental conditions to minimize circadian rhythm and environmental influences on performance and flexibility outcomes. Participants were instructed to maintain consistent dietary habits, avoid caffeine, alcohol, and strenuous exercise for at least 24 hours prior to testing, and ensure adequate sleep.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eWarm-up and Testing Sequence\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe experimental protocol consisted of seven sequential phases, as illustrated in Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e. Each participant performed the procedures in the same order and under identical environmental conditions to ensure consistency.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eStretching Protocols\u003c/b\u003e: Seven stretching conditions were applied in randomized order: a control condition (CON), SS, AIS, and four DS variations differing in duration and tempo (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e). All stretching techniques targeted the hamstring muscle group. The SS protocol was performed in the supine position; with the pelvis stabilized and the opposite leg extended on the floor, the investigator passively raised the test leg into hip flexion with the knee fully extended until the participant reached the point of mild discomfort, and this position was maintained for 30 seconds before switching sides (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003eA). Following this, the AIS protocol followed the standard contraction\u0026ndash;relaxation sequence: participants lay supine and actively lifted the test leg into hip flexion, briefly holding the terminal position for 2 seconds before returning to the starting position; this sequence was repeated 15 times per leg and the three-step AIS sequence is shown in Fig.\u0026nbsp;2B1-B3.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDescription of the seven stretching protocols applied in random order.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"2\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eProtocol\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDescription\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCON\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNo stretching\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSS\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e30 s per leg, static stretching in the supine position\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAIS\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e15 repetitions per leg, each with a 2 s active contraction\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDG30/100\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDynamic stretching for 30 s at 100 bpm\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDG30/150\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDynamic stretching for 30 s at 150 bpm\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDG75/100\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDynamic stretching for 75 s at 100 bpm\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDG75/150\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDynamic stretching for 75 s at 150 bpm\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cstrong\u003eTable note\u003c/strong\u003e \u003cp\u003eCON\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Control; SS\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Static Stretching; AIS\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Active Isolated Stretching; DG30/100\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Dynamic Stretching for 30 s at 100 bpm; DG30/150\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Dynamic Stretching for 30 s at 150 bpm; DG75/100\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Dynamic Stretching for 75 s at 100 bpm; DG75/150\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Dynamic Stretching for 75 s at 150 bpm.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe DS protocols consisted of rhythmic forward straight-leg swings performed through each participant\u0026rsquo;s active range of motion while maintaining full knee extension as depicted in Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003eC. Four DS variations were implemented to systematically manipulate tempo and duration: 30 seconds at 100 beats/min (DG30/100), 30 seconds at 150 beats/min (DG30/150), 75 seconds at 100 beats/min (DG75/100), and 75 seconds at 150 beats/min (DG75/150). Movement tempo was precisely controlled using a Musedo MT-40 digital metronome (\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.3% accuracy).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eHamstring flexibility was assessed using the passive straight-leg raise (PSLR) test with a Baseline 360\u0026deg; goniometer following standardized procedures (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e21\u003c/span\u003e). The axis was aligned over the greater trochanter, the stationary arm with the mid-axillary line of the trunk, and the movable arm with the lateral femoral epicondyle. All flexibility assessments were conducted by the same investigator to ensure measurement consistency. CMJ height and power output were recorded using a Swift Performance Speed Mat 260 (Swift Performance, Brisbane, Australia), which derives jump metrics from flight time (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e22\u003c/span\u003e). Participants performed three maximal CMJs with hands on hips, separated by ~\u0026thinsp;10 seconds, and the highest value was used for analysis. No rest, stretching, or additional movements were permitted between attempts (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe Perceived Recovery Status scale (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e23\u003c/span\u003e) was administered immediately before each CMJ test to quantify subjective readiness. Post-stretch assessments of PSLR and CMJ were obtained immediately, and again at 5 and 10 minutes following each intervention, in accordance with procedures commonly used to evaluate short-term potentiation and recovery responses (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec7\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eStatistical Analysis\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eAll analyses were conducted using IBM SPSS Statistics version 24. Data normality was tested using the Kolmogorov\u0026ndash;Smirnov test, along with Skewness and Kurtosis indices. Descriptive statistics (mean: \u0026plusmn; SD) were computed for all variables. The effects of stretching type and time were examined via two-way repeated-measures ANOVA (protocol \u0026times; time). When significant effects were detected, paired-samples t-tests and Tukey HSD post hoc tests were performed. Statistical significance was set at p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Results","content":"\u003cp\u003eAll 30 participants completed all experimental sessions and were included in the final analyses. No participants were excluded or lost to follow-up after randomization. The immediate post-stretching assessments indicated that all stretching protocols produced statistically significant improvements in hamstring ROM compared to baseline measurements (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05). Among the various protocols, AIS yielded a 5.55% improvement, whereas SS resulted in a more modest 3.22% increase. When considering the dynamic stretching protocols, DS 150/30 elicited the greatest enhancement, with a 7.35% increase in flexibility. DS 100/30 also produced a significant but smaller improvement of 4.34%. Notably, the longer-duration dynamic stretching protocols (DS 100/75 and DS 150/75) enhanced flexibility by 6.56% and 6.67%, respectively; however, these longer durations demonstrated diminishing returns compared to their shorter-duration counterparts.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cstrong\u003ePerformance Outcomes\u003c/strong\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn the realm of performance, CMJ metrics revealed the most substantial enhancements with the DS 150/30 protocol, resulting in an impressive increase of 11.39% in jump height and a 7.93% increase in mean power output. AIS also demonstrated notable efficacy with a 7.61% increase in jump height and a corresponding 4.81% increase in mean power output. Conversely, the DS 100/30 protocol provided a modest improvement of 1.81% in jump height and 1.26% in mean power output. Interestingly, extending the duration of the dynamic stretching exercises led to a decline in performance outcomes, as indicated by the DS 100/75 and DS 150/75 protocols, which resulted in decreases of \u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;0.20% and \u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1.43% in jump height, and declines of \u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;0.25% and \u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1.12% in mean power output, respectively. A comprehensive summary of these results is provided in Tables\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e and \u003cspan refid=\"Tab3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab2\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 2\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eChanges in Flexibility and CMJ Performance (Pre vs. Post-Test)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"5\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eProtocol\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFlexibility %\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCMJ %\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMean Power %\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePeak Power %\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSS\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e+\u0026thinsp;3.22\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e+\u0026thinsp;0.77\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e+\u0026thinsp;0.72\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e+\u0026thinsp;0.20\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAIS\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e+\u0026thinsp;5.55\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e+\u0026thinsp;7.61\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e+\u0026thinsp;4.81\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e+\u0026thinsp;2.19\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDS 100/30\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e+\u0026thinsp;4.34\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e+\u0026thinsp;1.81\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e+\u0026thinsp;1.26\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e+\u0026thinsp;0.58\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDS 150/30\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e+\u0026thinsp;7.35\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e+\u0026thinsp;11.39\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e+\u0026thinsp;7.93\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e+\u0026thinsp;3.34\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDS 100/75\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e+\u0026thinsp;6.56\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;0.20\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;0.25\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;0.08\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDS 150/75\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e+\u0026thinsp;6.67\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;1.43\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;1.12\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;0.46\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSS\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Static Stretching; AIS\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Active Isolated Stretching; DG30/100\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Dynamic Stretching for 30 s at 100 bpm; DG30/150\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Dynamic Stretching for 30 s at 150 bpm; DG75/100\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Dynamic Stretching for 75 s at 100 bpm; DG75/150\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Dynamic Stretching for 75 s at 150 bpm.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab3\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 3\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCMJ Performance at 5th and 10th min. Post-Stretching\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"3\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eProtocol\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e% (5th min.)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e% (10th min.)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSS\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e+\u0026thinsp;1.51%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e+\u0026thinsp;1.09%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAIS\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e+\u0026thinsp;8.77%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e+\u0026thinsp;4.80%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDS 100/30\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e+\u0026thinsp;4.02%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e+\u0026thinsp;4.06%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDS 150/30\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e+\u0026thinsp;12.21%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e+\u0026thinsp;13.17%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDS 100/75\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e+\u0026thinsp;1.30%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e+\u0026thinsp;1.40%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDS 150/75\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;0.49%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e+\u0026thinsp;1.201%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSS\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Static Stretching; AIS\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Active Isolated Stretching; DG30/100\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Dynamic Stretching for 30 s at 100 bpm; DG30/150\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Dynamic Stretching for 30 s at 150 bpm; DG75/100\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Dynamic Stretching for 75 s at 100 bpm; DG75/150\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Dynamic Stretching for 75 s at 150 bpm.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis crossover study demonstrates that brief, high-tempo dynamic stretching (DS 150/30) elicited the most pronounced acute improvements in explosive performance among the tested conditions. Specifically, CMJ height and power output increased by approximately 7\u0026ndash;8% compared to the CON, while AIS produced smaller but meaningful enhancements of around 4\u0026ndash;5%. In contrast, long-duration dynamic stretching protocols (75 seconds) resulted in trivial or slightly negative changes in CMJ metrics, suggesting that both tempo and duration are critical determinants of acute neuromuscular readiness. All stretching protocols significantly improved hamstring flexibility, with the largest increase observed following DS 150/30 and AIS.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThese findings align with previous meta-analytic and experimental evidence indicating that short-duration static stretching (\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;60 s per muscle) produces negligible or trivial reductions in maximal strength and power, whereas longer durations impair explosive performance. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e24\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e25\u003c/span\u003e) Similarly, dynamic stretching is generally advantageous or at least not detrimental when performed before activities requiring maximal effort (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e26\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e27\u003c/span\u003e). The present findings further emphasize that the tempo of dynamic stretching is a determinative factor in identifying its acute outcomes. In support of this notion, Paradisis et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e28\u003c/span\u003e) demonstrated that faster, rhythmically controlled dynamic movements enhance jump performance more effectively than slower movements. This pattern is consistent with our data, in which a tempo of 150 bpm produced superior CMJ outcomes compared with 100 bpm and longer stretching durations.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe effects of AIS observed in the present study contribute to clarifying the conflicting evidence in the literature. Prior studies have reported that AIS lasting longer than 60 seconds per muscle may lead to performance declines (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e). In contrast, our 30-second AIS protocol improved CMJ height and power, suggesting that the acute effects of AIS follow a time-dependent pattern similar to that observed for static stretching. This supports the hypothesis that AIS, when performed briefly, may enhance range of motion without inducing the neural inhibition or musculotendinous relaxation commonly seen after prolonged stretching.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe superior acute responses to AIS in the present study may also be explained by its unique physiological mechanisms. Unlike static stretching, AIS involves repetitive isotonic contractions that enhance local blood flow, oxygenation, and nutrient exchange, thereby improving tissue elasticity and neuromuscular efficiency (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e). These active contractions may facilitate reciprocal inhibition of antagonist muscles, promoting safer and more specific elongation of the targeted muscle groups. Furthermore, the brief stretch duration (~\u0026thinsp;2 s per repetition) prevents excessive muscle spindle activation and minimizes the stretch reflex, maintaining muscle excitability and power output. Controlled breathing during AIS may further reduce fatigue by limiting lactate accumulation and promoting parasympathetic activation, ultimately contributing to the enhanced flexibility and explosive performance observed in the current study (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe superior performance observed following DS 150/30 likely reflects a combination of neural and mechanical mechanisms. Rapid, brief dynamic movements enhance muscle temperature, elevate motoneuron excitability, and improve synchronization of motor unit recruitment. They may also potentiate the stretch-shortening cycle (SSC) by increasing elastic energy storage and neural facilitation, mechanisms consistent with post-activation performance enhancement (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e29\u003c/span\u003e). Conversely, extended or low-tempo dynamic stretching may elevate metabolic cost, reduce musculotendinous stiffness, and cause viscoelastic creep, thereby impairing power output and delaying the rate of force development.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe temporal analysis across the 1-, 5-, and 10-minute post-stretching intervals revealed that the performance enhancements induced by DS 150/30 persisted for at least 10 minutes. This time course supports the functional window of potentiation described in previous studies (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e). Such persistence underscores the practical relevance of high-tempo dynamic stretching, which appears to sustain explosive readiness during the transition from warm-up to performance. In contrast, the performance decrements following long-duration dynamic stretching likely reflect transient reductions in stiffness and decreased neural activation, possibly due to excessive musculotendinous relaxation.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFrom a practical standpoint, these results suggest that pre-performance warm-ups should incorporate brief (~\u0026thinsp;30 s) high-tempo (~\u0026thinsp;150 bpm) dynamic stretching targeting the primary muscles engaged in explosive movements. When dynamic stretching is not feasible, short-duration AIS (~\u0026thinsp;30 s) may serve as an effective alternative without compromising performance. However, long-duration dynamic stretching (\u0026ge;\u0026thinsp;75 s) should be avoided immediately prior to maximal efforts, as it may reduce jump height and power output. To optimize benefits, warm-ups should be completed within approximately 10 minutes before competition to capitalize on the temporal window of potentiation observed in this study.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe main advantages of this study are the within-subject comparisons, standardized testing conditions, and randomized crossover design with 72-hour intervals, which reduced interindividual variability. Internal validity was enhanced by the use of proven measurement tools in uniform environmental conditions for all flexibility and performance assessments. However, several limitations should be considered. Because the participant sample was limited to young, recreationally active males, generalization to females, older adults, or elite athletes is limited. Furthermore, the complexity of sport-specific explosive movements may not be fully captured by CMJ assessment in a controlled laboratory setting, limiting ecological validity. Future studies should assess individual variability between responders and non-responders, measure changes in muscle-tendon properties in relation to performance indicators and examine chronic adaptations resulting from repeated exposure to different stretching procedures.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn conclusion, the present findings demonstrate that the short-duration high-tempo dynamic stretching protocol (DS150/30) produced the most substantial acute enhancement in explosive performance, increasing CMJ height and power by approximately 7\u0026ndash;8% compared with the CON. AIS elicited moderate but positive effects, whereas long-duration dynamic stretching (\u0026ge;\u0026thinsp;75 s) failed to improve or slightly reduced CMJ performance. These results confirm that stretch duration and movement tempo are critical determinants of neuromuscular readiness and explosive performance. Additionally, all stretching techniques improved hamstring flexibility, with AIS and short-duration dynamic stretching producing the largest gains. Overall, implementing DS150/30 during the final minutes of a warm-up may effectively enhance acute power output while avoiding the potential performance-reducing effects associated with longer stretching durations.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003ePractical Applications\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eStrength and conditioning practitioners should incorporate brief, high-tempo dynamic stretching (~\u0026thinsp;30 s at ~\u0026thinsp;150 beats\u0026middot;min⁻\u0026sup1;) during the final phase of warm-up routines when explosive performance is required. This approach enhances jump performance and flexibility without reducing power output. Prolonged dynamic stretching (\u0026ge;\u0026thinsp;75 s per muscle group) should be avoided immediately before maximal efforts, as it may attenuate explosive performance. When dynamic stretching is not feasible, short-duration active isolated stretching (~\u0026thinsp;30 s total) can be used to improve range of motion without compromising neuromuscular readiness. To maximize potentiation effects, explosive activities should be performed within approximately 10 minutes after completing the warm-up.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Abbreviations","content":"\u003cp\u003eAIS \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;Active Isolated Stretching\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBMI \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; Body Mass Index\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eCMJ \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;Countermovement Jump\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eCON \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;Control Condition\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDS \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; Dynamic Stretching\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePAR-Q+ \u0026nbsp; Physical Activity Readiness Questionnaire for Everyone\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePSLR \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; Passive Straight-Leg Raise\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eROM \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;Range of Motion\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSSC \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; Stretch\u0026ndash;Shortening Cycle\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSS \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; Static Stretching\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEthics approval and consent to participate\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe study was approved by the Marmara University Faculty of Medicine Clinical Research Ethics Committee (Approval date and number: 02 April 2021 / 09.2021.283). All participants provided written informed consent prior to participation. All procedures were conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConsent for publication\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWritten informed consent for publication of the participant’s images was obtained.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAvailability of data and materials\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe datasets generated and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author (Yeliz Pınar) upon reasonable request.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCompeting interests\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe authors declare that they have no competing interests.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFunding\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAuthors’ contributions\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMS, YP, EA, and SP contributed to the conceptualization of the study. YP developed the methodology. MS and YP were responsible for software. EA and SP conducted the formal analysis. SP and MS carried out the investigation. MS, EA, and SP curated the data. EA performed the visualization. YP was responsible for supervision and validation. YP and SB managed project administration. EA, YP, MS, and SP wrote the original draft. SP, EA, MS, and YP reviewed and edited the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final version of the manuscript.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAcknowledgements\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis study is based on the doctoral thesis of the first author, completed under the supervision of Prof. Dr. Yeliz Pınar in the Department of Movement and Training Sciences at Marmara University, Institute of Health Sciences, Istanbul, Türkiye.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBehm DG, Alizadeh S, Daneshjoo A, et al. Acute effects of various stretching techniques on range of motion: A systematic review with meta-analysis. Sports Med Open. 2023;9:107.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBehm DG, Chaouachi A. A review of the acute effects of static and dynamic stretching on performance. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2011;111:2633\u0026ndash;51.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eShrier I. Does stretching improve performance? A systematic and critical review of the literature. Clin J Sport Med. 2004;14:267\u0026ndash;73.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKay AD, Blazevich AJ. Effect of acute static stretch on maximal muscle performance: A systematic review. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2012;44:154\u0026ndash;64.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBehm DG, Blazevich AJ, Kay AD, et al. Acute effects of muscle stretching on physical performance, range of motion, and injury incidence in healthy active individuals: A systematic review. Appl Physiol Nutr Metab. 2015;41:1\u0026ndash;11.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSimic L, Sarabon N, Markovic G. Does pre-exercise static stretching inhibit maximal muscular performance? A meta-analytical review. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2013;23:131\u0026ndash;48.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eButtifant D, Hrysomallis C. Effect of various practical warm-up protocols on acute lower-body power. J Strength Cond Res. 2015;29:656\u0026ndash;60.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eVernetta-Santana M, Ariza-Vargas L, Robles-Fuentes A, et al. Acute effect of active isolated stretching technique on range of motion and peak isometric force. J Sports Med Phys Fit. 2015;55:1253\u0026ndash;61.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWaqqash E, Osman N, Nadzalan AM, et al. Acute effects of active isolated stretching on vertical jump performance in active university students. J Fundam Appl Sci. 2018;9:1063\u0026ndash;70.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eYamaguchi T, Ishii K. Effects of static stretching for 30 seconds and dynamic stretching on leg extension power. J Strength Cond Res. 2005;19:677\u0026ndash;83.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFletcher IM, Jones B. The effect of different warm-up stretch protocols on 20-meter sprint performance in trained rugby union players. J Strength Cond Res. 2004;18:885\u0026ndash;8.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFletcher IM. The effect of different dynamic stretch velocities on jump performance. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2010;109:491\u0026ndash;8.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTorres EM, Kraemer WJ, Vingren JL, et al. Effects of stretching on upper-body muscular performance. J Strength Cond Res. 2008;22:1270\u0026ndash;7.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKonrad A, Tilp M. Time course of muscle-tendon unit function following three minutes of static stretching. J Sports Sci Med. 2014;13:642\u0026ndash;8.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCroisier JL, Ganteaume S, Binet J, et al. Strength imbalances and prevention of hamstring injury in professional soccer players: A prospective study. Am J Sports Med. 2008;36:1469\u0026ndash;75.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWitvrouw E, Danneels L, Asselman P, et al. Muscle flexibility as a risk factor for developing muscle injuries in male professional soccer players: A prospective study. Am J Sports Med. 2003;31:41\u0026ndash;6.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWarburton DER, Jamnik VK, Bredin SSD, et al. The physical activity readiness questionnaire for everyone (PAR-Q+) and the ePARmed-X+. Health Fit J Can. 2011;4:3\u0026ndash;17.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAmerican College of Sports Medicine. ACSM\u0026rsquo;s guidelines for exercise testing and prescription. Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer; 2021.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eManoel ME, Harris-Love MO, Danoff JV, et al. Acute effects of static, dynamic, and proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation stretching on muscle power in women. J Strength Cond Res. 2008;22:1528\u0026ndash;34.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePerrier ET, Pavol MJ, Hoffman MA. The acute effects of a warm-up including static or dynamic stretching on countermovement jump height, reaction time, and flexibility. J Strength Cond Res. 2011;25:1925\u0026ndash;31.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNorkin CC, White DJ. Measurement of joint motion: A guide to goniometry. Philadelphia: FA Davis; 2016.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSayers SP, Harackiewicz DV, Harman EA, et al. Cross-validation of three jump power equations. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1999;31:572\u0026ndash;7.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLaurent CM, Green JM, Bishop PA, et al. A practical approach to monitoring recovery: Development of a perceived recovery status scale. J Strength Cond Res. 2011;25:620\u0026ndash;8.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJi S, Lu H, Sun Z, et al. Acute effects of prolonged durations of static stretching on athletic performance and flexibility. Res Sports Med. 2025;33:000\u0026ndash;000.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBehm DG. The science and physiology of flexibility and stretching. 2nd ed. London: Routledge; 2024.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eZois J, Bishop DJ, Ball K, et al. High-intensity warm-ups elicit superior performance to a current soccer warm-up routine. J Sci Med Sport. 2011;14:522\u0026ndash;8.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSavaşan M, Pınar Y, Pınar S. Acute effects of various dynamic stretching exercises on jump performance and range of motion. Sport TK. 2025;14:000\u0026ndash;000.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eParadisis GP, Pappas PT, Theodorou AS, et al. Effects of static and dynamic stretching on sprint and jump performance in boys and girls. J Strength Cond Res. 2014;28:154\u0026ndash;60.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBlazevich AJ, Babault N. Post-activation potentiation versus post-activation performance enhancement in humans: Mechanisms and current issues. Front Physiol. 2019;10:1359.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":false,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"bmc-sports-science-medicine-and-rehabilitation","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"ssmr","sideBox":"Learn more about [BMC Sports Science, Medicine and Rehabilitation](http://bmcsportsscimedrehabil.biomedcentral.com/)","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"https://www.editorialmanager.com/ssmr/default.aspx","title":"BMC Sports Science, Medicine and Rehabilitation","twitterHandle":"BMC_series","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"em","reportingPortfolio":"BMC Series","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"Dynamic stretching, active isolated stretching, static stretching, countermovement jump, flexibility, explosive performance","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-8987549/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-8987549/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eStretching is commonly used in warm-up routines, yet evidence regarding its acute effects on flexibility and explosive performance remains mixed, particularly when considering technique, duration, and tempo. This study compared the immediate and short-term effects of static stretching (SS), active isolated stretching (AIS), and dynamic stretching (DS) protocols with different tempos and durations on hamstring flexibility and countermovement jump (CMJ) performance in active males. Thirty healthy, physically active men (22\u0026ndash;25 years; body mass index (BMI)\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;30 kg\u0026middot;m⁻\u0026sup2;), each with at least two years of resistance-training experience, completed a randomized cross-over design involving six stretching conditions: SS (30-s passive stretch), AIS (30-s total active contractions), and four DS variations combining tempo (100 or 150 beats/min) and duration (30 or 75s): DS100/30, DS150/30, DS100/75, and DS150/75. Hamstring flexibility was assessed using the Passive Straight-Leg Raise test, and CMJ height and power were measured using a Swift Performance Speed Mat. Measurements were obtained before stretching and immediately, 5 minutes, and 10 minutes afterward. Repeated-measures ANOVA and paired t-tests were used (p \u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.05). All stretching protocols significantly improved flexibility (p \u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.05), with the greatest improvements following DS150/30 and AIS. CMJ height and power increased at all post-stretch time points for DS150/30, AIS, and DS100/30 (p \u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.05), whereas longer DS durations (75 s) did not enhance performance. Short-duration, high-tempo dynamic stretching (150 bpm, 30 s) produced the most effective acute improvements in flexibility and explosive power. These findings emphasize the importance of stretch duration and tempo when designing warm-up routines.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Acute Effects Of Short-Term Static, Active Isolated, And Dynamic Stretching Protocols On Explosive Power and Hamstring Flexibility in Active Males","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2026-04-06 17:54:55","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-8987549/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0},{"type":"decision","content":"Revision requested","date":"2026-04-27T09:54:04+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2026-04-24T16:10:44+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2026-04-08T15:29:45+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"189535133363229461415226435954006326399","date":"2026-04-03T23:35:15+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"159162425173704830684665117780388120300","date":"2026-04-03T13:53:12+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewersInvited","content":"","date":"2026-04-01T09:46:43+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorAssigned","content":"","date":"2026-04-01T09:26:40+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvited","content":"","date":"2026-03-31T09:11:30+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"checksComplete","content":"","date":"2026-03-30T07:51:28+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"submitted","content":"BMC Sports Science, Medicine and Rehabilitation","date":"2026-03-30T07:45:16+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"bmc-sports-science-medicine-and-rehabilitation","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"ssmr","sideBox":"Learn more about [BMC Sports Science, Medicine and Rehabilitation](http://bmcsportsscimedrehabil.biomedcentral.com/)","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"https://www.editorialmanager.com/ssmr/default.aspx","title":"BMC Sports Science, Medicine and Rehabilitation","twitterHandle":"BMC_series","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"em","reportingPortfolio":"BMC Series","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"e25a1230-fb38-4a22-9718-02fb855dbbe3","owner":[],"postedDate":"April 6th, 2026","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"in-revision","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2026-04-27T10:10:50+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2026-04-06 17:54:55","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-8987549","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-8987549","identity":"rs-8987549","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"XKTyCvWXoU3ODBz1xrDgd","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}