Compassion between different methods of stretching (passive, active, and ballistic) on hip flexibility

Abstract

However, each method affects differently the neuromuscular system; therefore, each method can cause different acute responses on flexibility. Objective: Compare the flexibility between different methods of stretching. Methods: The sample was composed by 13 male (age: 26 ± 4.5 years; height: 176 ± 5.4 cm; body mass: 82 ± 7.5 kg) and 6 female recreationally trained (age: 23 ± 2.5 years; height: 163 ± 4.3 cm; body mass: 55.2 ± 9.1 kg). Subjects performed 3 visits to the laboratory to evaluate each method:  active static (AS), passive static (PS) and active dynamic (AD). In AS condition the subject held isometrically the knee flexion the knee flexion; in PS condition, subjects were stretched by one of the researchers; and in AD condition, subjects performed hip flexion to extension repeatedly with a controlled cadence. All subjects performed six sets of 45s stretching with 45s of rest interval, and an intensity between 70 to 90% of subject's rate of perceived discomfort in the maximal range of movement. Flexibility was measured by the sit-and-reach test before and immediately after each experimental condition. A repeated measures ANOVA (3x2) with the factors condition (AS, PS e AD) and moment of measure (Pre- and Post-Stretching) compared the performance on the sit and reach test. Results: It was observed an increase in flexibility for all methods: AS stretching (P <0.001; %=7.8%), PS stretching (P <0.001; %=18.1%), and AD stretching (P <0.001; %=15.7%); however, there were no differences between protocols. Conclusion: The active static, passive static, and the active dynamic protocols increase flexibility on sit-and-reach test in a similar level.