679

Aerobic activity before and following short-

duration static stretching improves range of
motion and performance vs. a traditional warm-up
Justin R. Murphy, Mario C. Di Santo, Thamir Alkanani, and David G. Behm

Abstract: Many activities necessitate a high degree of static joint range of motion (ROM) for an extended duration. The
objective of this study was to examine whether ROM could be improved with a short duration and volume of static
stretching within a warm-up, without negatively impacting performance. Ten male recreationally active participants com-
pleted 2 separate protocols to examine changes in ROM and performance, respectively, with different warm-ups. The
warm-up conditions for the ROM protocol were static stretching (SS), consisting of 6 repetitions of 6 s stretches; 10 min
of running prior to the SS (AS); and 5 min of running before and after the SS (ASA). The performance protocol included
a control condition of 10 min of running. Measures for the ROM protocol included hip flexion ROM, passive leg extensor
tension, and hamstring electromyographic (EMG) activity at pre-warm-up, and at 1, 10, 20, and 30 min post-warm-up. Per-
formance measures included countermovement jump (CMJ) height, reaction time (RT), movement time (MT), and balance
at pre-warm-up and at 1 and 10 min post-warm-up. The ASA produced greater ROM overall than the SS and AS condi-
tions (p < 0.0001), persisting for 30 min. There were no significant alterations in passive muscle tension or EMG. For the
performance protocol, there were no main effects for condition, but there was a main effect for time, with CMJ height
being greater at 1 and 10 min post-warm-up (p = 0.0004). Balance ratios and MT improved at 10 min post-warm-up (p <
0.0001). Results indicate that the ASA method can provide ROM improvements for 30 min with either facilitation or no
impairment in performance. This may be especially important for athletes who substitute later into a game with minimal
time for a full warm-up.
Key words: flexibility, countermovement jump, electromyography, balance, reaction time.
Résumé : De nombreuses activités requièrent un haut niveau d’amplitude articulaire statique (ROM) d’une durée prolon-
gée. Cette étude se propose de vérifier si on peut améliorer la ROM par l’inclusion de quelques exercices d’étirement sta-
tique de courte durée au cours de la séance d’échauffement, et ce, sans nuire à la performance. Dix participants masculins
physiquement actifs dans leur loisir participent à 2 séances expérimentales constituées respectivement d’exercices
d’échauffement différents afin d’en évaluer l’impact sur la ROM et la performance. Les exercices d’échauffement de la
séance expérimentale portant sur la ROM consistent en des étirements statiques (SS), soit 2 efforts d’une durée de 6 s; ou
une course d’une durée de 10 min avant les SS (AS); ou une course d’une durée de 5 min avant et après les SS (ASA).
La séance expérimentale portant sur la performance comporte une course de contrôle d’une durée de 10 min. Les mesures
prises avant l’échauffement puis 1 min, 10 min, 20 min et 30 min après l’échauffement pour l’évaluation de la ROM sont
l’amplitude de flexion de la hanche, la tension passive des extenseurs de la jambe et l’activité myoélectrique (EMG) des
muscles ischiojambiers. Les mesures de performance incluent la hauteur de saut précédé d’un contre-mouvement (CMJ), le
temps de réaction (TR), le temps de mouvement (MT) et l’équilibre, et ce, avant l’échauffement puis 1 min et 10 min
après l’échauffement. La condition ASA améliore plus la ROM que les conditions SS et AS (p < 0,0001); cet effet dure
30 min. On n’observe aucune différence significative de tension musculaire passive et d’activité myoélectrique. En ce qui
concerne la séance expérimentale portant sur la performance, on n’observe pas d’effets principaux reliés à la condition en
tant que telle, mais un effet dans le temps : la hauteur du CMJ est plus grande 1 min et 10 min après l’échauffement (p =
0,0004). Les ratios d’équilibre et le MT sont meilleurs 10 min après l’échauffement (p < 0,0001). D’après ces observa-
tions, la condition ASA peut susciter des améliorations de la ROM durant 30 min tout en améliorant la performance ou en
ne lui nuisant pas. Ces observations sont pertinentes pour tout athlète s’intégrant plus tard dans le match et disposant de
peu de temps pour un échauffement complet.
Mots-clés : flexibilité, saut avec contre-mouvement, électromyographie, équilibre, temps de réaction.
[Traduit par la Rédaction]

Received 29 March 2010. Accepted 29 July 2010. Published on the NRC Research Press Web site at apnm.nrc.ca on 6 October 2010.
J.R. Murphy, T. Alkanani, and D.G. Behm.1 School of Human Kinetics and Recreation, Memorial University of Newfoundland,
St. John’s, NL A1C 5S7, Canada.
M.C. Di Santo. Instituto del Profesorado en Educacion Fisica, Cordoba, Argentina.
1Corresponding author (e-mail: dbehm@mun.ca).

Appl. Physiol. Nutr. Metab. 35: 679–690 (2010) doi:10.1139/H10-062 Published by NRC Research Press
680
Introduction
Static stretching has been considered an essential compo-
nent of a warm-up for decades (Young and Behm 2002).
The traditional warm-up consists of a submaximal aerobic
component (e.g., running, cycling), which is designed to
raise the body temperature 1 to 2 8C (Young and Behm
2002; Young 2007). The increase in body and muscle tem-
perature has been found to increase nerve conduction veloc-
ity and increase muscle compliance (Young and Behm 2002;
Bishop 2003). Traditionally, the second component has been
a bout of static stretching (Young and Behm 2002; Young
2007). Static stretching has been demonstrated to be an ef-
fective means of increasing range of motion (ROM) about
the joint (Bandy et al. 1997; Power et al. 2004). This bout
of stretching is usually followed by a segment of skill re-
hearsal, where the athletes perform dynamic movements
similar to the sport or event for which they are preparing
(Young and Behm 2002).
Static stretching exercises have been used for decades as a
major component of warm-up protocols in sports and fitness
classes (Shellock and Prentice 1985). However, the prepon-
derance of literature over the past dozen years has reported
static stretch-induced impairments in isometric (Kokkonen
et al. 1998; Fowles et al. 2000; Behm et al. 2001; Nelson et
al. 2001a) and isokinetic (Nelson et al. 2001b) force, jump
height (Young and Elliott 2001; Young and Behm 2003;
Unick et al. 2005; Behm and Kibele 2007), sprint time
(Fletcher and Jones 2004; Nelson et al. 2005c; Fletcher and
Anness 2007), muscle activation (Rosenbaum and Hennig
1995; Behm et al. 2001; Power et al. 2004), reaction and
movement time, and balance (Behm et al. 2004). A number
of these studies have used extensive durations that involved
30 to 60 min (Fowles et al. 2000; Avela et al. 2004) or 15 to
20 min (Behm et al. 2001; Cramer et al. 2005; Bacurau et
al. 2009) of static stretching. Many other studies, using pro-
longed static stretching durations of more than 20 to 30 s
with 3 or more repetitions (Behm et al. 2001, 2004, 2006;
Young and Behm 2003; Power et al. 2004; Behm and Ki-
bele 2007; Chaouachi et al. 2008, 2010), have also illus-
trated static stretch-induced impairments. However, these
durations do not reflect common pre-event stretching prac-
tice among recreational or most elite athletes. For example,
a series of articles that surveyed North American strength
and conditioning coaches from professional sports reported
average stretch repetition durations of approximately 12.0 s
(Ebben et al. 2005), 14.5 s (Simenz et al. 2005), 17.0 s
(Ebben et al. 2004), and 18.0 s (Ebben and Blackard 2001)
for baseball, basketball, hockey, and football players, re-
spectively.
It is possible that there is a volume effect associated with
the stretch-induced impairments (Knudson and Noffal 2005;
Young et al. 2006). Table 1 illustrates a sample of studies
that demonstrate no detrimental effect of shorter durations
of static stretching (Knudson and Noffal 2005; Zakas et al.
2006a, 2006b; Ogura et al. 2007; Beedle et al. 2008; Franco
et al. 2008; Siatras et al. 2008; Torres et al. 2008). Other
examples, including studies using a total of 45 s (Knudson
et al. 2001; González-Ravé et al. 2009), £60 s (Robbins and
Scheuermann 2008), and £90 s (Behm et al. 2006; Samuel et
al. 2008) of static stretching, have reported no effects on
Appl. Physiol. Nutr. Metab. Vol. 35, 2010
jump heights. Young et al. (2006) identified a volume effect
to their stretching regime. A greater duration of stretching
resulted in greater deficits. Thus, a novel objective of this
study was to examine the duration and effectiveness of a
shorter duration (6 s) of static stretching on ROM and per-
formance. There are no studies, to our knowledge, that have
incorporated such a brief duration (6-s repetitions) of static
stretching to examine its effect on ROM and subsequent per-
formance.
Why even include static stretching in a warm-up? There
are many dynamic sports in which enhanced static flexibility
would be expected to affect performance. Some examples
include the ability of a goaltender in ice hockey to maxi-
mally abduct his or her legs when in a butterfly position,
gymnasts performing and holding a split position, and activ-
ities performed in wrestling, martial arts, synchronized
swimming, and figure skating. Whereas some studies have
indicated that dynamic stretching provides increases in static
flexibility that are similar to those in static stretching
(Beedle and Mann 2007; Herman and Smith 2008), other
studies have indicated that dynamic stretching is not as ef-
fective at increasing static flexibility as static stretching
(Bandy et al. 1998; Chan et al. 2001; Davis et al. 2005;
O’Sullivan et al. 2009; Covert et al. 2010). Hence, it could
be important to include static stretching in the warm-up for
specific sport flexibility applications. However, it is just as
important to ensure the static stretching does not impair sub-
sequent performance.
Another important aspect of this study was to examine the
effect of providing aerobic activity before and after the
stretching routine. Even when combined with a prior aerobic
activity (Behm et al. 2001; Power et al. 2004; Behm and Ki-
bele 2007; Fletcher and Anness 2007; Vetter 2007; Cè et al.
2008; Holt and Lambourne 2008), dynamic warm-up (Wall-
mann et al. 2008; Winchester et al. 2008), or skill rehearsal
(Young and Behm 2003), static stretching has still exerted
negative influences upon subsequent performance. Jumping
performance deteriorated with static stretching followed by
a second aerobic warm-up (Pearce et al. 2009). On the other
hand, Chaouachi et al. (2010) conducted a sequencing study
implementing 8 stretch protocols that sequenced static and
dynamic stretching at different intensities and orders with a
control warm-up condition. There were no significant effects
on sprint, agility, or jump performance. However, all these
studies used repetitions with 15 s or more of static stretching.
Short-duration stretching with a second aerobic warm-up to
maintain an elevated core temperature could be important
for ensuring an enhanced flexibility and athletic perform-
ance, both at the commencement of the match and when
an athlete is inserted into the competition mid-match with
minimum time for further stretching or sport-specific activ-
ities. Will a second bout of aerobic activity following static
stretching prolong possible increases in flexibility for
30 min after stretching the muscle?
There are very few studies that include a second bout of
aerobic activity after the stretching component or that test
flexibility changes for 30 min poststretching. Of the 27 stud-
ies documented that monitored changes in flexibility, only
1 study implemented activity following the static stretching
routine (Viale et al. 2007) (Table 2). A number of studies
implemented poststretching activities into their warm-up
Published by NRC Research Press
Murphy et al.
Table 1. Effect of prolonged static stretching duration on subsequent performance.
Study Procedure
Beedle et al. (2008) 315 s
Franco et al. (2008) 1, 2, or 3 stretches20 s
Knudson and Noffal (2005) 1010 s
Ogura et al. (2007) 30 s vs. 60 s stretch
Siatras et al. (2008) 1 stretch of 10, 20, 30, or 60 s
Torres et al. (2008) 215 s
Zakas et al. (2006a) 130 s vs. 1030 s vs. 1630 s stretches
Zakas et al. (2006b) 315 s vs. 2015 s
Note: MVC, maximal voluntary contraction; 1RM, 1 repetition maximum.
procedure, but tested for measures other than ROM (Young
and Behm 2003; Fradkin et al. 2004; Richendollar et al.
2006; Saez Saez de Villarreal et al. 2007; Guidetti et al.
2007; Skof and Strojnik 2007; Needham et al. 2009). Fur-
thermore, the vast majority (16 of 27) of studies tested for
ROM almost immediately following the static stretching in-
tervention (Table 2), while only 3 studies in this survey pro-
vided data beyond 20 min of the stretching intervention.
Thus, it would be vital to investigate if a warm-up procedure
can prolong increases in ROM without negatively impacting
performance.
Thus, the objectives of this study were to determine the
effect of 6-s repetitions of static stretching alone (SS),
10 min of aerobic cycling followed by 6-s repetitions of SS
(AS), and 5 min of aerobic cycling prior to and following
6-s repetitions of SS (ASA) on hip flexion ROM and subse-
quent performance. It was hypothesized that the ASA condi-
tion would provide the most persistent (longest duration)
enhanced flexibility without impairments to performance.
Methodology
Experimental design
Two experimental protocols (ROM and performance
measures), using the same interventions and subjects, were
conducted (Fig. 1). The ROM protocol involved 3 condi-
tions (SS, AS, ASA). The SS for the ROM study involved 6
repetitions of 6-s hip extensor passive stretches. The AS
condition involved a 10 min treadmill run prior to the SS,
while the ASA condition involved 5 min of treadmill run-
ning prior to and following the stretching routine. The
ROM experimental protocol measured pre- and postinterven-
tion changes in hip flexion passive ROM, passive hip exten-
sor muscle tension, and integrated electromyographic
(EMG) activity of the hamstrings at the maximum hip flex-
ion ROM. Postintervention measures for the ROM experi-
ment were taken at 1-, 10-, 20-, and 30-min intervals after
the warm-up condition.
The performance protocol involved 4 conditions (SS, AS,
ASA, and control). For the performance protocol, there were
6 repetitions each of 6-s passive stretches for the hip exten-
sors, quadriceps, and plantar flexors. The AS and ASA con-
ditions employed the same aerobic activity as the ROM
protocol. The control condition for the performance protocol
involved a 10-min treadmill run without a stretching routine.
The performance protocol measured pre- and postinterven-
tion changes to countermovement jump (CMJ) height, bal-
ance contacts, balance ratio, reaction time (RT), and
681
Effects
No significant effect on 1RM bench or leg press
; Muscle endurance after 40 s
; Grip strength only after 40 s of stretch
; MVC with 60-s stretch
; Isokinetic torque only after 30- and 60-s stretches
No change in throw performance
; Isokinetic torque only after multiple stretches
; Isokinetic torque only after 300-s stretching
movement time (MT). Based on pilot data showing no ef-
fects after 10 min, the performance experiment took post-
intervention measurements at 1 and 10 min after the warm-up.
Subjects
Eleven male volunteers (age, 22–30 years; height, 182.1 ±
8.26 cm; weight, 84.6 ± 9.03 kg) were recruited from the
university population (Memorial University of Newfound-
land, St. John’s, N.L.). Based on their activity levels, partic-
ipants were 6 recreationally active (2–3 activity sessions per
week of 30–60 min) and 5 trained (5–6 activity sessions per
week with the goal of improving performance in resistance
training or a competitive sport, such as kick boxing, hockey,
or squash) subjects. Participants were verbally informed of
the procedures, and read and signed a consent form and a
physical activity readiness questionnaire (PAR-Q) before
participating. The Memorial University of Newfoundland
Human Investigation Committee approved the study.
ROM protocol setup
The 3 conditions (SS, AS, ASA) were randomly ordered;
each subject completed all 3 conditions in a random order
on nonconsecutive days. A pretest was used as the control
condition in the ROM protocol, as a previous study (Power
et al. 2004) showed that with approximately 10 min between
tests, single 3- to 5-s stretches will not affect subsequent
ROM testing results (i.e., at 1, 10, 20, and 30 min). Pre-
and postintervention tests included passive hip flexion ROM
to maximum stretch tolerance (as verbally indicated by the
subjects and their perception of pain and discomfort), pas-
sive leg extensor tension force, and integrated EMG activity
at maximum ROM. A total of 3 measurements were taken,
and the closest 2 ROM measures were used for analysis
(Power et al. 2004; Behm and Kibele 2007; Huang et al.
2010); this was also true for the corresponding leg extensor
passive force and EMG readings for those ROM measures.
Following baseline testing, subjects were instructed to fol-
low the assigned condition for that session. The 3 experi-
mental conditions differed, based on the implementation of
aerobic activity prior to and after stretching.
The SS condition required subjects to perform 6 repeti-
tions of 6-s static hip extensor stretches to the dominant leg
(dominance was chosen as the leg used to kick a ball) after
baseline measures were recorded. This ROM technique in-
volved the subject adopting a standing position and placing
a heel (with an extended leg) on a 50-cm high platform.
Subjects would then reach forward, with their arms toward
the extended leg, while maintaining a proper lordotic curve.
Published by NRC Research Press
682 Appl. Physiol. Nutr. Metab. Vol. 35, 2010

Table 2. Studies documenting changes in range of motion (ROM) with static stretching (SS).

Timing of post-SS Was activity

Author SS protocol measures included after SS? ROM results
Bacurau et al. (2009) 3 sets of 630 s 5 min post SS No 10.4%–19.1% :
Beedle and Mann (2007) 330 s Post SS No 4.4% : vs. ballistic stretching
Beedle et al. (2007) 315 s Post SS No NS
Behm and Kibele (2007) 430 s 5 min post SS No 12.1% :
Brandenburg (2006) 315 s, 330 s Post SS No 8.1%–10.1% :
Church et al. (2001) ~1 min per muscle group Post SS No NS
Costa et al. (2010) 9135 s 2 min post SS No 15% :
Curry et al. (2009) 312 s 5 and 30 min post SS No 5.3% :, –3.2% (NS)
Faigenbaum et al. (2005) 5 min SS 2–30 min post SS No 20.8% ; than dynamic exercise
Funk et al. (2003) 15 s stretches for 5-min Post SS No NS
duration
Herda et al. (2008) 9135 s Post SS No 19% :
Kinser et al. (2007) 1610 s Post SS No 0.2%–2% :
Kokkonen et al. (1998) 5 stretches615 s Post SS No 16% :
Marek et al. (2005) 430 s Post SS No 1.2%–1.4% :
Nelson et al. (2005a) 5 stretches615 s 10 min post SS No 6% :
Nelson et al. (2005b) 1630 s 10 min post SS No 5.7%–6% :
Nordez et al. (2006) 530 s Post SS No 6%–8% :
Ogura et al. (2007) 30 or 60 s 2–3 min post SS No 17%–24% :
Power et al. (2004) 4.5 min SS 2 h post SS No 7.4% :
Viale et al. (2007) 6.5 min of quadriceps SS 3 min post SS Yes; 60 assisted knee 10.7% :
flexion–extensions
Whatman et al. (2006) 420 s 5–20 min post SS No Significant :
Winke et al. (2010) 330 s Post SS No 19.3% :
Worrell et al. (1994) 420 s Post SS No NS
Zakas (2005) 160 s, 230 s, 415 s Post SS No 5.6%–18.7% :
Zakas et al. (2005) 130 s, 215 s, 615 s Post SS No 2%–28.5% :
Zakas et al. (2006b) 130 s, 1030 s, 1630 s Post SS No 2.8%–3.2%
Zakas et al. (2006a) 315 s, 2015 s Post SS No 2.7%–3.1%
Note: NS, no significance.

All subjects were informed of the relative intensity at which
to hold each stretch (a subjective measure of 80% of maxi-
mum discomfort was used to ensure maximum ROM for
each subject) (Behm and Kibele 2007). The point of discom-
fort was described to the participants as the point at which
they first felt the onset of uncomfortable tension or stretch
in the hamstrings. Between the 6 repetitions of 6-s stretches,
6 s of relaxation was permitted. The participant was also in-
structed to remain relaxed and to avoid any voluntary con-
tractions.
The other 2 conditions differed from the SS condition, in
that aerobic activity was implemented prior to stretching. A
10-min treadmill warm-up at 10 km
h–1 was introduced prior
to the SS procedure for the AS condition. In the third condi-
tion, 5 min of aerobic treadmill running (10 km
h–1) pre-
ceded and followed the SS procedure (ASA).
Testing measures
The pretesting measures were similar for all subjects, in
that both height and weight were recorded prior to experi-
mentation. Pre- and post-test measures included maximum
hip flexion ROM, passive leg extensor tension (force), and
integrated EMG activity associated with the maximum
ROM. Post-test ROM measures were conducted at 1-, 10-,
20-, and 30-min intervals after the warm-up condition.
Hip flexion ROM
Static flexibility is defined as the ROM that is available to
a joint or series of joints (Gleim and McHugh 1997). Hip
flexion ROM in this study was measured directly, using a
manual goniometer (Baseline) and the passive straight leg
raise technique (Hall et al. 2001). The goniometer was accu-
rate to 18. An analysis of repeated tests resulted in a reliabil-
ity coefficient of 0.96. The greater trochanter was used as a
reference point for the axis of the goniometer. Reference
points were also marked on a subject’s leg and torso to en-
sure accuracy and to limit variance in repeated measure-
ments. This ROM technique involved placing the subject in
a supine position, ensuring the knee remained in full exten-
sion. The subject’s leg was passively raised to induce flex-
ion at the hip with minimal hip rotation until the subject
verbally indicated the point of discomfort had been reached.
The point of discomfort was described to the participants as
the point at which they first felt the onset of uncomfortable
tension or stretch in the hamstrings. During the leg raise, no
movement of the opposite leg was ensured. The participant
was instructed to remain relaxed and to avoid any voluntary
contractions.
Passive hip extensor muscle tension
Passive tension of the muscle is described as the tension

Published by NRC Research Press

Murphy et al.
Fig. 1. Experimental protocol. EMG, electromyography; ROM, range of motion. (ROM); SS, static stretch.
provided by the tendons and muscle membranes when the
muscles are not activated (Hall 2007). Changes in passive
muscle tension associated with the interventions would illus-
trate whether alterations to the muscle mechanical properties
(e.g., compliance) had occurred. The passive tension of the
hip extensor musculature was indirectly measured, using the
passive torque force created at the ankle joint at the point of
discomfort during the hip flexion ROM procedure, as de-
scribed above. The passive torque force was measured using
a hand-held dynamometer (Lafayette Manual Muscle Test
System Model 01163). The hand-held dynamometer oper-
ates at a range of 0 to 22.6 kg and is accurate to ±1% over
the full scale. Its resolution is 0.1 kg. The hand-held dyna-
mometer was placed 2 cm superior to the calcaneous, and
manually held there for 3 s at the point of maximum ROM
(Fig. 2).
EMG
EMG activity was monitored in an effort to ascertain
683
whether the interventions provoked reflex-modulated
changes in muscle EMG activity. Unlike a strong muscular
contraction, the EMG activity from a passive stretch was ex-
pected to provide a low signal to noise ratio. Since the sig-
nal to noise ratio was expected to be low, and the day-to-
day variability is higher than within-session variability, a
pretest was used for all interventions in an attempt to de-
crease the variability that might appear when EMG activity
is recorded and compared from separate days (sessions).
Measurements of the length of the anterior aspect of the
thigh were recorded, from the anterior superior iliac spine
to the apex of the patella. A mark at the midpoint was re-
corded on the subject’s thigh as a reference point for elec-
trode placement of the quadriceps. Another measurement
for the hamstring was taken at the midpoint of the ischial
tuberosity to the posterior aspect of the lateral epicondyle
of the femur. As in previous studies, electrodes were placed
at the midpoint of both the agonist and antagonists to pro-
vide a substantial signal from the multiple muscle groups of
Published by NRC Research Press
684
Fig. 2. Photo of the hip extensor passive muscle tension procedure.
the quadriceps and hamstrings, as well as to investigate any
possible increases in co-activation (Behm et al. 2001; Huang
et al. 2010). Skin preparations included shaving the area of
interest, removing dead epithelial cells with a piece of sand-
paper, and cleansing the area with isopropyl rubbing alcohol
(70%). Two electrocardiography conductive adhesive elec-
trodes (Ag/AgCl, disc shaped, 10 mm in diameter; Kendall
Medi-Trace 130) were placed back to back (approximately
2 cm apart) over the marked midpoints on both the anterior
and posterior aspects of the thigh. A fifth electrode was
used as a ground and placed on the proximal head of the
fibula. EMG activity was sampled at 2000 Hz, with a
Blackman –61 dB band-pass filter between 10 to 500 Hz,
amplified (bipolar differential amplifier; input impedance =
2 MO; common mode rejection ratio ‡ 110 dB min (50/60 Hz);
gain  1000; noise ‡ 5 mV), and analog-to-digitally
converted (12 bit) and stored on a personal computer for
further analysis. EMG was full-wave rectified and inte-
grated over a 3 s period during the 6-s maximum ROM.
The EMG data acquisition commenced once the subject
indicated that the maximal ROM was achieved.
Performance protocol setup
The performance portion of the experiment was com-
pleted in separate sessions from the ROM experiment, since
the variety of measurements involved in the 2 protocols
would not have allowed for the timely completion of testing
at each recovery period. The performance experiment used
the same warm-up interventions, but differed in measures,
the recovery testing periods, and the muscles stretched. Post-
intervention testing was conducted at 1 and 10 min after
warm-up. The same duration and intensity of SS was imple-
mented for the hamstrings, quadriceps, and plantar flexors.
The leg extensor (primarily hamstring) stretch was the same
as in the ROM study. The quadriceps stretch involved flex-
ing the knee toward the buttocks while standing, and provid-
ing additional tension by pulling the lower leg segment
Appl. Physiol. Nutr. Metab. Vol. 35, 2010
toward the buttocks with the ipsilateral arm. The plantar
flexor stretch had the subject, with a fully extended leg,
place his foot flat on the floor and use the forward lean of
his body to dorsiflex the ankle, while supporting his body
against a wall. The subject would stretch 1 muscle and
then, without rest, stretch the contralateral muscle; this al-
lowed the subject to move immediately from one stretch to
the next. The order of stretches was randomized.
Balance test
Two balance tests were conducted, and the average of the
2 tests was used for analysis. Both parameters were moni-
tored and calculated, with a software program (Innervations,
Muncie, Ind.), from the 30 s wobble board test (Kinematic
Measurement Systems, Muncie, Ind.). A metal plate con-
nected to the computer hardware was placed under the wob-
ble board. When the perimeter of the wobble board made
contact with the metal plate, the duration and frequency
(during the 30-s test) of contact was recorded by the soft-
ware. The static balance test included the number of times
the edge of a subject’s circular wobble board came in con-
tact with the base metal plate over the 30 s. A balance ratio
was calculated as time of contact with the floor to no con-
tact. Subjects received an orientation session for the balance
board on a separate day, and performed 1 or 2 practice at-
tempts on the day of testing. The day to day reliability of
the balance test using an intraclass coefficient correlation
has been determined to be 0.81, with a between-test (single
session) reliability of 0.86 (Behm et al. 2004).
RT and MT
RT and MT tests were measured with an apparatus devel-
oped by the Memorial University of Newfoundland Techni-
cal Services (Electronics, N.L.). The testing apparatus
consisted of a stop clock (58007, Lafayette Instrument Com-
pany, Lafayette, Ind.); an analog timer (L15-365/099, Triton
Electronics, Essex, UK); a stop clock latch (58027, Lafay-
ette Instrument Company), which connected the stop clock
Published by NRC Research Press
Murphy et al.
and the analog timer; a custom-designed box (62 cm
(length)  15.5 cm (width)  9 cm (height)), with a dis-
tance of 50 cm from center of the start button to the center
of the stop button; and a trigger plate for the start of the
task. With the device situated on the floor, the task entailed
movement of the dominant foot in response to the illumina-
tion of an incandescent light bulb. The subject would start
with the nondominant foot on the floor and the ball of the
dominant foot on the start button. Upon illumination of the
light bulb, the subject would release the start button and
move his foot forward to touch the stop button (50 cm). RT
was measured as the time between the illumination of light
stimulus and the release of the start button. MT was meas-
ured as the time between the initiation of the movement
and the depression of the stop button. The actions involved
hip flexion, knee extension, and plantar flexion. To move as
quickly as possible, the quadriceps and plantar flexors would
initiate the movement, while the hamstrings would aid with
the deceleration of the leg to accurately touch the stop but-
ton. Two trials of RT and MT were performed, separated by
30-s rest periods. An average of the 2 tests was used for
analysis. The day-to-day reliability of the RT and MT tests
using an intraclass coefficient correlation has been deter-
mined to be 0.60 and 0.89, respectively, with no significant
(p < 0.05) difference between values for test and retest
(Behm et al. 2004). Between-test (single session) intraclass
coefficient correlation reliability measures of 0.79 and 0.93
have been documented for RT and MT, respectively (Behm
et al. 2004).
CMJ height
Two CMJs were performed for each testing time (Young
and Behm 2003; Power et al. 2004; Behm et al. 2006; Kean
et al. 2006; Behm and Kibele 2007). For ecological validity,
each subject was permitted an arm swing, and the depth and
timing of the downward phase was not regulated so that the
movement was natural. Chalk was placed on the subject’s
hands, and the investigator was positioned on a 1-m plat-
form to examine the placement of the fingers on the measur-
ing tape area. The investigator could distinguish jump
heights within 1 cm.
Statistical analysis
Data for the ROM protocol were analyzed with a 3  4
(protocol (S, AS, ASA)  time (1, 10, 20, and 30 min
post)) 2-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) with repeated
measures, using SPSS 16.0 Statistical Analysis Software
(Chicago, Ill.). Dependent variables for the 2 factors (pro-
tocol and time) included ROM, passive muscle tension force,
and integrated EMG of the hamstrings. A 1-way ANOVA was
also conducted to determine significant interactions be-
tween the coefficients of the regression slopes for changes
in ROM over the 3 protocols. Data for the performance
protocol were analyzed with a 4  2 (protocol (SS, AS,
ASA, control)  time (1, 10 min post)) 2-way ANOVA
with repeated measures, using SPSS 16.0. Dependent varia-
bles for the 2 factors included CMJ height, RT, MT, bal-
ance contacts, and balance ratio. If significant interactions
were present, a Bonferroni post hoc analysis was con-
ducted. Significant differences are reported at p < 0.05.
Descriptive statistics are reported as means ± SD.
685
Results
The data for changes in hip extension ROM, passive ten-
sion, EMG activity, and any performance measures did not
show significant skewness or kurtosis for any condition. A
Kolomogorov–Smirnov normality test was conducted, indi-
cating that the data were normal for all conditions and meas-
ures. Mauchly’s test was conducted on the data, and
sphericity was not violated (Field 2005).
ROM protocol
A main effect for condition showed that the ASA pro-
duced 41.4% and 75.2% greater ROM overall than the SS
and AS conditions, respectively (p < 0.0001). Significant
ROM interactions were evident with the ASA at 10, 20, and
30 min, producing 64.7%, 83.1%, and 95.4% significantly
greater ROM than the corresponding SS conditions, respec-
tively (p < 0.002) (Fig. 3). Similarly, the ROM for the ASA
protocol at 10, 20, and 30 min was 47.4%, 47.2%, and
46.5% significantly greater than the corresponding AS con-
ditions (p < 0.002) (Fig. 1). The ROM at 30 min for the AS
condition was also 91.3% significantly greater than the SS
condition at the same time interval (p < 0.002) (Fig. 3).
A significant interaction was also found when comparing
the coefficient of regression for the slopes of each protocol
over the total duration. The slope for the ASA protocol was
significantly different than the slope for the SS protocol (p =
0.01) (Fig. 4). There was no significant difference for the
AS protocol.
The differences in ROM did not have any significant ef-
fect on EMG for the hamstrings or the quadriceps; nor did
they affect passive muscle force during the stretch (Table 3).
Performance protocol
There were no main effects for condition for any of the
performance variables, indicating no advantage or disadvant-
age for any of the warm-up conditions in terms of subse-
quent performance.
There were main effects for time for the CMJ, balance ra-
tio, and MT. The pretest CMJ heights were 4.1% and 1.6%
significantly (p = 0.0004) less than the heights achieved at 1
and 10 min of recovery, respectively (Table 4). There was a
significant difference between balance ratios at pretest and
at 10 min of recovery. The balance ratio at pretest was
8.1% (nonsignificant) and 16.7% (p < 0.0001) less than that
at 1 and 10 min of recovery, respectively (Table 2). Simi-
larly, MT at pretest was 5.4% (nonsignificant) and 8.1%
(p < 0.0001) slower than at 1 and 10 min of recovery, re-
spectively (Table 4).
There were no significant main effects or interactions
concerning impairments or facilitation of balance contacts
or RT with any of the warm-up conditions or over time.
Discussion
The most important findings of this study were that the
ASA condition provided the greatest increase in ROM,
which persisted over a 30-min period. Second, when 6 s
static stretching was incorporated into the warm-up condi-
tions, there were no impairments in subsequent RT or bal-
ance performance (number of contacts). In fact, any
Published by NRC Research Press
686
Fig. 3. The effect of different stretching protocols on the duration of increased range of motion (ROM). Vertical bars represent SD. *, p <
0.002 for AS > S; {, p < 0.0002 for both ASA > S and for ASA >AS. SS, static stretching condition; AS, 10 min of running prior to SS;
ASA, 5 min of running before and after SS.
Fig. 4. The coefficients of regression for the slopes of each proto-
col over the total duration of pretest and recovery. *, The ASA
slope is significantly different than the SS slope (p = 0.01). The AS
condition did not differ from either the SS or ASA conditions.
combination of six 6-s static stretching, with or without 5 to
10 min of aerobic activity, improved subsequent CMJ
height, MT, and balance ratios. The 36 s of static stretching
in this study is of greater duration than the stretching routine
of a typical professional athlete (Ebben and Blackard 2001;
Ebben et al. 2004, 2005; Simenz et al. 2005), yet it did not
diminish performance. Thus, for sports that necessitate static
flexibility maneuvers, athletes should perform a warm-up
that involves at least 5 min of aerobic activity before and
following a short duration and volume (i.e., 6 repetitions of
6 s) of static stretching. The increase in ROM could be ex-
pected to endure for at least 30 min, and not negatively im-
pact, and possibly even improve, subsequent performance.
This information is especially important for athletes who
Appl. Physiol. Nutr. Metab. Vol. 35, 2010
start the game or who are inserted into the game after pas-
sively sitting on the bench or waiting on the sidelines. These
athletes using the ASA technique could expect a significant
increase in ROM to persist for 30 min after their initial
warm-up.
As there were no main effects for condition with the per-
formance measures, all conditions, including the control
condition (10 min treadmill run but no stretching), provided
improvements in CMJ height, MT, and balance ratios. The
goal of the aerobic component (e.g., running, cycling) in a
traditional warm-up is to raise the body temperature 1–2 8C
(Young and Behm 2002; Young 2007). The increase in body
and muscle temperature has been found to increase nerve
and muscle action potential conduction velocity and increase
muscle compliance (Young and Behm 2002; Bishop 2003),
which could contribute to jump height, MT, and balance en-
hancement.
In contrast to our findings, Young and Behm (2003)
found that when static stretching was implemented in a
warm-up protocol that involved a prior aerobic warm-up
and subsequent sport-specific activities, vertical jump per-
formance was impaired. However, their study utilized 2 min
of stretching per muscle group. Our study illustrates that a
shorter duration of static stretching (36 s) did not negatively
impact the positive influence of the prior aerobic warm-up
activity. A number of studies have demonstrated that shorter
durations of stretching may not adversely impact perform-
ance. There were no significant impairments in isokinetic
torque with 10 and 20 s of static stretching, but there were
deficits with 30 and 60 s (Siatras et al. 2008), as well as def-
icits with 10-, 16-, and 30-s stretches, but not with a single
30-s stretch (Zakas et al. 2006a). Other studies have re-
ported no significant change in throw performance with
30 s of static stretching (Torres et al. 2008), and no effect
of 45 s of stretching on 1 repetition maximum bench and
leg press (Beedle et al. 2008). Knudson and Noffal (2005)
Published by NRC Research Press
Murphy et al. 687

Table 3. Range of motion (ROM) protocol recovery data for hamstring passive muscle
tension and integrated electromyography (EMG).

Condition 1-min recovery 10-min recovery 20-min recovery 30-min recovery

Hip extensor passive tension (kg)
SS 4.1±9.6 6.5±13.6 7.1±13.2 7.3±9.1
AS 5.6±10.3 5.7±8.2 8.2±6.8 5.5±7.1
ASA 4.2±13.6 5.9±10.0 6.3±10.7 5.2±13.6
Hamstring EMG activity (mV)
SS 13.4±53.1 12.9±61.7 15.6±48.2 13.8±47.1
AS 18.6±53.6 14.1±61.1 11.8±82.5 14.2±83.2
ASA 18.6±72.5 19.5±54.9 11.2±60.2 23.5±63.8
Note: AS, 10 min of running prior to the SS; ASA, 5 min of running before and after the SS;
EMG, electromyography; SS, static stretch.

Table 4. Performance measures.

Measure Pretest 1-min recovery 10-min recovery p

Countermovement jump (cm) 48.2±5.0 50.2±5.5a 49.5±5.5a 0.0004
Balance ratio 1.61±0.61 1.71±0.71 1.88±0.84a <0.0001
Balance contacts 31.2±8.2 30.8±9.2 30.6±10.2
Reaction time (ms) 284.1±58.7 268.7±61.8 311.2±72.4
Movement time (ms) 440.3±177.4 429.1±41.1 406.4±26.8a,b <0.0001
a
Significant differences between the recovery and the pretest measure.
b
Significant difference between 1 and 10 min of recovery.

indicated that 40–100 s of stretching impaired grip strength,
while 10–30 s did not. Hence, short-duration static stretch-
ing may present less stress to the muscle, allowing the posi-
tive effects of the aerobic warm-up to induce metabolic and
neural responses to enhance performance.
However, because the ASA condition provided perform-
ance enhancements similar to the other conditions, but with
the greatest increases in ROM over 30 min, this protocol
would be the recommended option. Providing a second aero-
bic component following the static stretching would have
been expected to maintain the elevated temperature for a
longer period of time than no treadmill running (SS condi-
tion), or 10 min of running alone (control) or prior to
stretching (AS).
The significant increase in hip flexion ROM in this study
did not elicit increases in passive leg extensor tension. In a
previous study (Huang et al. 2010), hamstring passive ten-
sion increased 21.3% over a 208 hip flexion ROM. Thus,
the lack of increase in leg extensor passive tension with a
stretch-induced increase in ROM could suggest increased
muscle compliance or decreased muscle stiffness due to the
SS interventions. Another possibility is that the treadmill
aerobic activity caused increases in skin and muscle temper-
atures, leading to augmented blood flow to the area (Weera-
pong et al. 2005). Thus, the ASA condition, with its
combination of aerobic activity and stretching, may have
provided the greatest decrease in muscle–tendon stiffness.
EMG activity did not increase with the increased ROM in
our study. Taking into consideration that an increased ROM
should place the muscle spindles under greater stress (due to
an elongated or stretched muscle), an increase in EMG ac-
tivity due to spindle-induced stretch reflexes might be ex-
pected. However, Chalmers (2004) found that the amount of
reflex-induced EMG activity associated with a maximum
ROM is very low or minimal, and may not be physiologi-
cally meaningful. Similarly, Magnusson et al. (1996) ob-
served a stretch-induced EMG signal equal to only 1% of
the maximal voluntary contraction EMG. Since, in their
study, the EMG activity did not change in conjunction with
force loss after 90 s of stretch, they also concluded that the
EMG associated with the stretch reflex did not contribute
significantly to the stretch-induced force resistance. If there
are neurophysiological inhibitory responses present, the sig-
nal to noise ratio of the global (surface) EMG signal may
not be sensitive enough to illustrate these effects.
Further limitations to the study may include the diversity
of the subject population, which consisted of recreationally
active and trained individuals. While there may have been
some variability in their responses, it could be argued that
they also represented a wider scope of the population, allow-
ing greater application of the results to a more general pop-
ulation.
Conclusion
All combinations of six 6-s static stretching, with or with-
out 5 to 10 min of aerobic activity, improved subsequent
CMJ height, MT, and balance ratios. The ASA condition
provided the greatest increase in hip flexion ROM over the
30-min testing period, with either no impairment (RT, bal-
ance contacts) or facilitation (jump height, MT, and balance
ratio) of subsequent performance. This substantial and pro-
longed increase in ROM may be attributed to a combination
of a maintained elevated muscle and core temperature due to
the aerobic activity before and following the stretching, in
conjunction with the positive effects of static stretching on
flexibility. One mechanism of the ASA warm-up effects on
ROM may be attributed to increased muscle tendon compli-
ance, as evidenced by the lack of increase in passive muscle

Published by NRC Research Press

688
tension with the increased ROM. Individuals who are in-
volved in prolonged activities (e.g., 30 min) that involve a
static flexibility component are urged to adopt an ASA-style
warm-up protocol (short duration and volume of static stretch-
ing sandwiched between at least 5 min of aerobic activity).
Acknowledgements
This research was partially funded by the Natural Science
and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) of Canada.
References
Avela, J., Finni, T., Liikavainio, T., Niemelä, E., and Komi, P.V.
2004. Neural and mechanical responses of the triceps surae mus-
cle group after 1 h of repeated fast passive stretches. J. Appl.
Physiol. 96(6): 2325–2332. PMID:14966020.
Bacurau, R.F., Monteiro, G.A., Ugrinowitsch, C., Tricoli, V., Cabral,
L.F., and Aoki, M.S. 2009. Acute effect of a ballistic and a static
stretching exercise bout on flexibility and maximal strength. J.
Strength Cond. Res. 23(1): 304–308. PMID:19057408.
Bandy, W.D., Irion, J.M., and Briggler, M. 1997. The effect of
time and frequency of static stretching on flexibility of the ham-
string muscles. Phys. Ther. 77(10): 1090–1096. PMID:9327823.
Bandy, W.D., Irion, J.M., and Briggler, M. 1998. The effect of sta-
tic stretch and dynamic range of motion training on the flexibil-
ity of the hamstring muscles. J. Orthop. Sports Phys. Ther.
27(4): 295–300. PMID:9549713.
Beedle, B.B., and Mann, C.L. 2007. A comparison of two warm-
ups on joint range of motion. J. Strength Cond. Res. 21(3):
776–779. doi:10.1519/R-19415.1. PMID:17685684.
Beedle, B.B., Leydig, S.N., and Carnucci, J.M. 2007. No difference in
pre- and postexercise stretching on flexibility. J. Strength Cond.
Res. 21(3): 780–783. doi:10.1519/R-20736.1. PMID:17685710.
Beedle, B., Rytter, S.J., Healy, R.C., and Ward, T.R. 2008. Pretest-
ing static and dynamic stretching does not affect maximal
strength. J. Strength Cond. Res. 22(6): 1838–1843. PMID:
18841081.
Behm, D.G., and Kibele, A. 2007. Effects of differing intensities of sta-
tic stretching on jump performance. Eur. J. Appl. Physiol. 101(5):
587–594. doi:10.1007/s00421-007-0533-5. PMID:17674024.
Behm, D.G., Button, D.C., and Butt, J.C. 2001. Factors affecting
force loss with prolonged stretching. Can. J. Appl. Physiol.
26(3): 261–272. PMID:11441230.
Behm, D.G., Bambury, A., Cahill, F., and Power, K. 2004. Effect
of acute static stretching on force, balance, reaction time, and
movement time. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 36(8): 1397–1402.
doi:10.1249/01.MSS.0000135788.23012.5F. PMID:15292749.
Behm, D.G., Bradbury, E.E., Haynes, A.T., Hodder, J.N., Leonard,
A.M., and Paddock, N.R. 2006. Flexibility is not related to stretch-
induced deficits in force or power. J. Sports Sci. Med. 5: 33–42.
Bishop, D. 2003. Warm up I: potential mechanisms and the effects of
passive warm up on exercise performance. Sports Med. 33(6): 439–
454. doi:10.2165/00007256-200333060-00005. PMID:12744717.
Brandenburg, J.P. 2006. Duration of stretch does not influence the
degree of force loss following static stretching. J. Sports Med.
Phys. Fitness, 46(4): 526–534. PMID:17119516.
Cè, E., Margonato, V., Casasco, M., and Veicsteinas, A. 2008. Ef-
fects of stretching on maximal anaerobic power: the roles of ac-
tive and passive warm-ups. J. Strength Cond. Res. 22(3): 794–
800. PMID:18438238.
Chalmers, G. 2004. Re-examination of the possible role of Golgi
tendon organ and muscle spindle reflexes in proprioceptive neu-
romuscular facilitation muscle stretching. Sports Biomech. 3(1):
159–183. doi:10.1080/14763140408522836. PMID:15079994.
Appl. Physiol. Nutr. Metab. Vol. 35, 2010
Chan, S.P., Hong, Y., and Robinson, P.D. 2001. Flexibility and passive
resistance of the hamstrings of young adults using two different sta-
tic stretching protocols. Scand. J. Med. Sci. Sports, 11(2): 81–86.
doi:10.1034/j.1600-0838.2001.011002081.x. PMID:11252465.
Chaouachi, A., Chamari, K., Wong, P., Castagna, C., Chaouachi,
M., Moussa-Chamari, I., and Behm, D.G. 2008. Stretch and
sprint training reduces stretch-induced sprint performance defi-
cits in 13- to 15-year-old youth. Eur. J. Appl. Physiol. 104(3):
515–522. doi:10.1007/s00421-008-0799-2. PMID:18584200.
Chaouachi, A., Castagna, C., Chtara, C., Brugheilly, M., Galy, O.,
Chamari, K., and Behm, D.G. 2010. Effects of warm-ups invol-
ving static or dynamic stretching on agility, sprinting and jump-
ing performance in trained individuals. J. Strength Cond.
Res.24(8): 2001–2011.. doi:10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181aeb181.
PMID:19855310.
Church, J.B., Wiggins, M.S., Moode, F.M., and Crist, R. 2001. Effect
of warm-up and flexibility treatments on vertical jump perfor-
mance. J. Strength Cond. Res. 15(3): 332–336. doi:10.1519/1533-
4287(2001)015<0332:EOWUAF>2.0.CO;2. PMID:11710660.
Costa, P.B., Ryan, E.D., Herda, T.J., Walter, A.A., Hoge, K.M.,
and Cramer, J.T. 2010. Acute effects of passive stretching on
the electromechanical delay and evoked twitch properties. Eur.
J. Appl. Physiol. 108(2): 301–310. doi:10.1007/s00421-009-
1214-3. PMID:19784666.
Covert, C.A., Alexander, M.P., Petronis, J.J., and Davis, D.S. 2010.
Comparison of ballistic and static stretching on hamstring mus-
cle length using an equal stretching dose. J. Strength Cond. Res..
doi:10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181bf3bb0. PMID:20375742.
Cramer, J.T., Housh, T.J., Weir, J.P., Johnson, G.O., Coburn, J.W.,
and Beck, T.W. 2005. The acute effects of static stretching on
peak torque, mean power output, electromyography, and me-
chanomyography. Eur. J. Appl. Physiol. 93(5–6): 530–539.
PMID:15599756.
Curry, B.S., Chengkalath, D., Crouch, G.J., Romance, M., and Manns,
P.J. 2009. Acute effects of dynamic stretching, static stretching,
and light aerobic activity on muscular performance in women. J.
Strength Cond. Res. 23(6): 1811–1819. PMID:19675479.
Davis, D.S., Ashby, P.E., McCale, K.L., McQuain, J.A., and Wine,
J.M. 2005. The effectiveness of 3 stretching techniques on ham-
string flexibility using consistent stretching parameters.
J. Strength Cond. Res. 19(1): 27–32. doi:10.1519/14273.1.
PMID:15705041.
Ebben, W.P., and Blackard, D.O. 2001. Strength and conditioning
practices of National Football League strength and conditioning
coaches. J. Strength Cond. Res. 15(1): 48–58. doi:10.1519/1533-
4287(2001)015<0048:SACPON>2.0.CO;2. PMID:11708706.
Ebben, W.P., Carroll, R.M., and Simenz, C.J. 2004. Strength and
conditioning practices of National Hockey League strength and
conditioning coaches. J. Strength Cond. Res. 18(4): 889–897.
doi:10.1519/14133.1. PMID:15574099.
Ebben, W.P., Hintz, M.J., and Simenz, C.J. 2005. Strength and
conditioning practices of Major League Baseball strength and
conditioning coaches. J. Strength Cond. Res. 19(3): 538–546.
doi:10.1519/R-15464.1. PMID:16095401.
Faigenbaum, A.D., Bellucci, M., Bernieri, A., Bakker, B., and
Hoorens, K. 2005. Acute effects of different warm-up protocols
on fitness performance in children. J. Strength Cond. Res. 19(2):
376–381. doi:10.1519/R-15344.1. PMID:15903378.
Field, A. 2005. Discovering statistics using SPSS. 2nd ed. Sage
Publications, London, England. 104–212.
Fletcher, I.M., and Anness, R. 2007. The acute effects of combined
static and dynamic stretch protocols on fifty-meter sprint perfor-
mance in track-and-field athletes. J. Strength Cond. Res. 21(3):
784–787. doi:10.1519/R-19475.1. PMID:17685686.
Published by NRC Research Press
Murphy et al.
Fletcher, I.M., and Jones, B. 2004. The effect of different warm-up
stretch protocols on 20 meter sprint performance in trained
rugby union players. J. Strength Cond. Res. 18(4): 885–888.
doi:10.1519/14493.1. PMID:15574098.
Fowles, J.R., Sale, D.G., and MacDougall, J.D. 2000. Reduced
strength after passive stretch of the human plantarflexors. J.
Appl. Physiol. 89(3): 1179–1188. PMID:10956367.
Fradkin, A.J., Sherman, C.A., and Finch, C.F. 2004. Improving golf
performance with a warm up conditioning programme. Br. J.
Sports Med. 38(6): 762–765. doi:10.1136/bjsm.2003.009399.
PMID:15562177.
Franco, B.L., Signorelli, G.R., Trajano, G.S., and de Oliveira, C.G.
2008. Acute effects of different stretching exercises on muscular en-
durance. J. Strength Cond. Res. 22(6): 1832–1837. PMID:18978623.
Funk, D.C., Swank, A.M., Mikla, B.M., Fagan, T.A., and Farr, B.K.
2003. Impact of prior exercise on hamstring flexibility: a compar-
ison of proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation and static
stretching. J. Strength Cond. Res. 17(3): 489–492. doi:10.1519/
1533-4287(2003)017<0489:IOPEOH>2.0.CO;2. PMID:12930174.
Gleim, G.W., and McHugh, M.P. 1997. Flexibility and its effects
on sports injury and performance. Sports Med. 24(5): 289–299.
doi:10.2165/00007256-199724050-00001. PMID:9368275.
González-Ravé, J.M., Machado, L., Navarro-Valdivielso, F., and
Vilas-Boas, J.P. 2009. Acute effects of heavy-load exercises,
stretching exercises, and heavy-load plus stretching exercises on
squat jump and countermovement jump performance. J. Strength
Cond. Res. 23(2): 472–479. PMID:19209075.
Guidetti, L., Emerenziani, G.P., Gallotta, M.C., and Baldari, C.
2007. Effect of warm up on energy cost and energy sources of
a ballet dance exercise. Eur. J. Appl. Physiol. 99(3): 275–281.
doi:10.1007/s00421-006-0348-9. PMID:17165061.
Hall, S. 2007. Basic biomechanics. 1st ed. Prentice Hall Publishers,
Upper Saddle River, N.J. pp. 110–145.
Hall, T., Cacho, A., McNee, C., Riches, J., and Walsh, J. 2001. Ef-
fects of Mulligan traction straight leg technique on range of
movement. 1st ed. Lippincott William and Wilkins Publishers,
Philadelphia, Pa. pp. 48–132
Herda, T.J., Cramer, J.T., Ryan, E.D., McHugh, M.P., and Stout,
J.R. 2008. Acute effects of static versus dynamic stretching on
isometric peak torque, electromyography, and mechanomyogra-
phy of the biceps femoris muscle. J. Strength Cond. Res. 22(3):
809–817. PMID:18438236.
Herman, S.L., and Smith, D.T. 2008. Four-week dynamic stretch-
ing warm-up intervention elicits longer-term performance bene-
fits. J. Strength Cond. Res. 22(4): 1286–1297. PMID:18545176.
Holt, B.W., and Lambourne, K. 2008. The impact of different warm-
up protocols on vertical jump performance in male collegiate ath-
letes. J. Strength Cond. Res. 22(1): 226–229. PMID:18296979.
Huang, S.Y., Di Santo, M., Wadden, K.P., Cappa, D.F., Alkanani,
T., and Behm, D.G. 2010. Short-duration massage at the ham-
strings musculotendinous junction induces greater range of mo-
tion. J. Strength Cond. Res. 24(7): 1917–1924. PMID:20543728.
Kean, C.O., Behm, D.G., and Young, W.B. 2006. Fixed foot bal-
ance training increases rectus femoris activation during landing
and jump height in recreationally active women. J. Sports Sci.
Med. 5: 138–148.
Kinser, A.M., Ramsey, M.W., O’Bryant, H.S., Ayres, C.A., Sands,
W.A., and Stone, M.H. 2008. Vibration and stretching effects on
flexibility and explosive strength in young gymnasts. Med. Sci.
Sports Exerc. 40(1): 133–140. PMID:18091012.
Knudson, D., and Noffal, G. 2005. Time course of stretch-induced
isometric strength deficits. Eur. J. Appl. Physiol. 94(3): 348–
351. doi:10.1007/s00421-004-1309-9. PMID:15711989.
Knudson, D., Bennett, K., Corn, R., Leick, D., and Smith, C. 2001.
689
Acute effects of stretching are not evident in the kinematics of the
vertical jump. J. Strength Cond. Res. 15(1): 98–101. doi:10.1519/
1533-4287(2001)015<0098:AEOSAN>2.0.CO;2. PMID:11708715.
Kokkonen, J., Nelson, A.G., and Cornwell, A. 1998. Acute muscle
stretching inhibits maximal strength performance. Res. Q. Exerc.
Sport, 69(4): 411–415. PMID:9864760.
Magnusson, S.P., Simonsen, E.B., Dyhre-Poulsen, P., Aagaard, P.,
Mohr, T., and Kjaer, M. 1996. Viscoelastic stress relaxation dur-
ing static stretch in human skeletal muscle in the absence of
EMG activity. Scand. J. Med. Sci. Sports, 6(6): 323–328.
doi:10.1111/j.1600-0838.1996.tb00101.x. PMID:9046541.
Marek, S.M., Cramer, J.T., Fincher, A.L., Massey, L.L., Dangelmaier,
S.M., Purkayastha, S., et al. 2005. Acute effects of static and
proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation stretching on muscle
strength and power output. J. Athl. Train. 40(2): 94–103.
PMID:15970955.
Needham, R.A., Morse, C.I., and Degens, H. 2009. The acute effect
of different warm-up protocols on anaerobic performance in
elite youth soccer players. J. Strength Cond. Res. 23(9): 2614–
2620. PMID:19910812.
Nelson, A.G., Allen, J.D., Cornwell, A., and Kokkonen, J. 2001a.
Inhibition of maximal voluntary isometric torque production by
acute stretching is joint-angle specific. Res. Q. Exerc. Sport,
72(1): 68–70. PMID:11253322.
Nelson, A.G., Guillory, I.K., Cornwell, C., and Kokkonen, J.
2001b. Inhibition of maximal voluntary isokinetic torque pro-
duction following stretching is velocity-specific. J. Strength
Cond. Res. 15(2): 241–246. doi:10.1519/1533-4287(2001)
015<0241:IOMVIT>2.0.CO;2. PMID:11710411.
Nelson, A.G., Kokkonen, J., and Arnall, D.A. 2005a. Acute muscle
stretching inhibits muscle strength endurance performance. J.
Strength Cond. Res. 19(2): 338–343. doi:10.1519/R-15894.1.
PMID:15903372.
Nelson, A.G., Kokkonen, J., and Eldredge, C. 2005b. Strength inhi-
bition following an acute stretch is not limited to novice stretch-
ers. Res. Q. Exerc. Sport, 76(4): 500–506. PMID:16739688.
Nelson, A.G., Driscoll, N.M., Landin, D.K., Young, M.A., and
Schexnayder, I.C. 2005c. Acute effects of passive muscle stetch-
ing on sprint performance. J. Sports Sci. 23(5): 449–454. PMID:
16194993.
Nordez, A., Cornu, C., and McNair, P. 2006. Acute effects of static
stretching on passive stiffness of the hamstring muscles calcu-
lated using different mathematical models. Clin. Biomech.
(Bristol, Avon), 21(7): 755–760. doi:10.1016/j.clinbiomech.
2006.03.005. PMID:16675080.
O’Sullivan, K., Murray, E., and Sainsbury, D. 2009. The effect of
warm-up, static stretching and dynamic stretching on hamstring
flexibility in previously injured subjects. BMC Musculoskelet.
Disord. 10: 1037–1042 PMID:19371432..
Ogura, Y., Miyahara, Y., Naito, H., Katamoto, S., and Aoki, J.
2007. Duration of static stretching influences muscle force pro-
duction in hamstring muscles. J. Strength Cond. Res. 21(3):
788–792. doi:10.1519/R-18785.1. PMID:17685679.
Pearce, A.J., Kidgell, D.J., Zois, J., and Carlson, J.S. 2009. Effects
of secondary warm up following stretching. Eur. J. Appl. Phy-
siol. 105(2): 175–183. doi:10.1007/s00421-008-0887-3. PMID:
18850108.
Power, K., Behm, D., Cahill, F., Carroll, M., and Young, W. 2004.
An acute bout of static stretching: effects on force and jumping
performance. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 36(8): 1389–1396. doi:10.
1249/01.MSS.0000135775.51937.53. PMID:15292748.
Richendollar, M.L., Darby, L.A., and Brown, T.M. 2006. Ice bag ap-
plication, active warm-up, and 3 measures of maximal functional
performance. J. Athl. Train. 41(4): 364–370. PMID:17273459.
Published by NRC Research Press
690
Robbins, J.W., and Scheuermann, B.W. 2008. Varying amounts of
acute static stretching and its effect on vertical jump perfor-
mance. J. Strength Cond. Res. 22(3): 781–786. PMID:18438240.
Rosenbaum, D., and Hennig, E.M. 1995. The influence of stretch-
ing and warm-up exercises on Achilles tendon reflex activity.
J. Sports Sci. 13(6): 481–490. doi:10.1080/02640419508732265.
PMID:8850574.
Saez Saez de Villarreal, E., González-Badillo, J.J., and Izquierdo,
M. 2007. Optimal warm-up stimuli of muscle activation to en-
hance short and long-term acute jumping performance. Eur. J.
Appl. Physiol. 100(4): 393–401. doi:10.1007/s00421-007-0440-
9. PMID:17394010.
Samuel, M.N., Holcomb, W.R., Guadagnoli, M.A., Rubley, M.D.,
and Wallmann, H. 2008. Acute effects of static and ballistic
stretching on measures of strength and power. J. Strength Cond.
Res. 22(5): 1422–1428. PMID:18714248.
Shellock, F.G., and Prentice, W.E. 1985. Warming-up and stretch-
ing for improved physical performance and prevention of sports-
related injuries. Sports Med. 2(4): 267–278. doi:10.2165/
00007256-198502040-00004. PMID:3849057.
Siatras, T.A., Mittas, V.P., Mameletzi, D.N., and Vamvakoudis,
E.A. 2008. The duration of the inhibitory effects with static
stretching on quadriceps peak torque production. J. Strength
Cond. Res. 22(1): 40–46. PMID:18296954.
Simenz, C.J., Dugan, C.A., and Ebben, W.P. 2005. Strength and
conditioning practices of National Basketball Association
strength and conditioning coaches. J. Strength Cond. Res. 19(3):
495–504. doi:10.1519/15264.1. PMID:16095396.
Skof, B., and Strojnik, V. 2007. The effect of two warm-up proto-
cols on some biomechanical parameters of the neuromuscular
system of middle distance runners. J. Strength Cond. Res.
21(2): 394–399. doi:10.1519/R-18055.1. PMID:17530940.
Torres, E.M., Kraemer, W.J., Vingren, J.L., Volek, J.S., Hatfield,
D.L., Spiering, B.A., et al. 2008. Effects of stretching on upper-
body muscular performance. J. Strength Cond. Res. 22(4):
1279–1285. PMID:18545177.
Unick, J., Kieffer, H.S., Cheesman, W., and Feeney, A. 2005. The
acute effects of static and ballistic stretching on vertical jump
performance in trained women. J. Strength Cond. Res. 19(1):
206–212. doi:10.1519/R-14843.1. PMID:15705036.
Vetter, R.E. 2007. Effects of six warm-up protocols on sprint and
jump performance. J. Strength Cond. Res. 21(3): 819–823.
doi:10.1519/R-20296.1. PMID:17685698.
Viale, F., Nana-Ibrahim, S., and Martin, R.J. 2007. Effect of active
recovery on acute strength deficits induced by passive stretch-
ing. J. Strength Cond. Res. 21(4): 1233–1237. doi:10.1519/R-
21476.1. PMID:18076263.
Wallmann, H.W., Mercer, J.A., and Landers, M.R. 2008. Surface
electromyographic assessment of the effect of dynamic activity
and dynamic activity with static stretching of the gastrocnemius
on vertical jump performance. J. Strength Cond. Res. 22(3):
787–793. PMID:18438239.
Appl. Physiol. Nutr. Metab. Vol. 35, 2010
Weerapong, P., Hume, P.A., and Kolt, G.S. 2005. The mechanisms
of massage and effects on performance, muscle recovery and in-
jury prevention. Sports Med. 35(3): 235–256. doi:10.2165/
00007256-200535030-00004. PMID:15730338.
Whatman, C., Knappstein, A., and Hume, P. 2006. Acute changes
in passive stiffness and range of motion post-stretching. Phys.
Ther. Sport, 7: 195–200.
Winchester, J.B., Nelson, A.G., Landin, D., Young, M.A., and
Schexnayder, I.C. 2008. Static stretching impairs sprint perfor-
mance in collegiate track and field athletes. J. Strength Cond.
Res. 22(1): 13–19. PMID:18296950.
Winke, M.R., Jones, N.B., Berger, C.G., and Yates, J.W. 2010.
Moderate static stretching and torque production of the knee
flexors. J. Strength Cond. Res. 24(3): 706–710. PMID:20145556.
Worrell, T.W., Smith, T.L., and Winegardner, J. 1994. Effect of
hamstring stretching on hamstring muscle performance.
J. Orthop. Sports Phys. Ther. 20(3): 154–159. PMID:7951292.
Young, W.B. 2007. The use of static stretching in warm-up for
training and competition. Int. J. Sports Physiol. Perform. 2(2):
212–216. PMID:19124908.
Young, W., and Behm, D. 2002. Should static stretching be used
during a warm-up for strength and power activities? Strength
Condit. J. 24(6): 33–37.
Young, W.B., and Behm, D.G. 2003. Effects of running, static
stretching and practice jumps on explosive force production and
jumping performance. J. Sports Med. Phys. Fitness, 43(1): 21–
27. PMID:12629458.
Young, W., and Elliott, S. 2001. Acute effects of static stretching,
proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation stretching, and maxi-
mum voluntary contractions on explosive force production and
jumping performance. Res. Q. Exerc. Sport, 72(3): 273–279.
PMID:11561392.
Young, W., Elias, G., and Power, J. 2006. Effects of static stretch-
ing volume and intensity on plantar flexor explosive force pro-
duction and range of motion. J. Sports Med. Phys. Fitness,
46(3): 403–411. PMID:16998444.
Zakas, A. 2005. The effect of stretching duration on the lower ex-
tremity flexibility of adolescent soccer players. J. Bodyw. Mov.
Ther. 9(3): 220–225. doi:10.1016/j.jbmt.2004.07.002.
Zakas, A., Balaska, P., Grammatikopoulou, M.G., Zakas, N., and
Vergou, A. 2005. Acute effects of stretching duration on the
range of motion of elderly women. J. Bodyw. Mov. Ther. 9(4):
270–276. doi:10.1016/j.jbmt.2004.10.006.
Zakas, A., Doganis, G., Papakonstandinou, V., Sentelidis, T., and
Vamvakoudis, E. 2006a. Acute effects of static stretching duration
on isokinetic peak torque production of soccer players. J. Bodyw.
Mov. Ther. 10(2): 89–95. doi:10.1016/j.jbmt.2005.04.007.
Zakas, A., Doganis, G., Zakas, N., and Vergou, A. 2006b. Acute
effects of active warm-up and stretching on the flexibility of el-
derly women. J. Sports Med. Phys. Fitness, 46(4): 617–622.
PMID:17119529.
Published by NRC Research Press