Comparison of the sequencing of plyometric exercises and dynamic stretching on athletic and neuromuscular performance in soccer players

Acute effects of plyometric-dynamic stretching sequencing on athletic and neuromuscular performance in soccer players: A randomized crossover trial

Status

Active, not recruiting

Phases

Unknown

Study type

Interventional

Source

IRCT

Registry ID

IRCT20230612058457N9

Enrollment

Registered

2026-05-23

Start date

2026-03-16

Completion date

Unknown

Last updated

2026-06-01

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Athletic Performance.

Interventions

Intervention 1: Intervention group: After 5 minutes of standard warm-up, the participant first performed dynamic stretching exercises consisting of two leg swing movements (anterior-posterior and medi

Eligibility

Sex/Gender

Male

Age

18 Years to 25 Years

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: Male soccer players aged 18 to 25 years Competed at the university or competitive amateur club level Completed a minimum of three training sessions and one match per week Played in one of the following field positions: forward, midfielder, or full-back Had at least six months of structured soccer training Reported no lower limb injuries in the preceding three months

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: Being a goalkeeper Being a central defender (due to distinct physical demands) Having current musculoskeletal injuries Using performance-enhancing supplements (e.g., creatine, beta-alanine, anabolic agents) Being unable to complete all testing sessions Having any medical condition that contraindicated maximal exercise

Design outcomes

Primary

Measure	Time frame
Agility. Timepoint: Pre-test (before intervention) and post-test (immediately after 2 minutes of rest following the intervention). Method of measurement: Timing gates (Speedlight, Swift Performance, Australia) placed at hip height (0.7 m) to align with the center of mass at the start/finish line. The participant began from a stationary two-point staggered stance with the front foot placed 0.5 m behind the start gate to prevent premature triggering. Time was recorded in seconds. Participants completed two maximal efforts with 2 minutes of passive recovery between attempts. The best (fastest) completion time was recorded.;Repetetive speed ability total time. Timepoint: Pre-test (before intervention) and post-test (immediately after 2 minutes of rest following the intervention). Method of measurement: Six bouts of 10-meter sprints (including 5 meters straight and 5 meters with a 45° cut) with 25 seconds of passive recovery between each bout. Standing start. Timing gates (Speedlight, Swift Performance, Australia) were positioned at the start line (0 m) and the finish line (10 m total distance). Total time was calculated as the sum of all six sprint times and recorded in seconds.;Repetetive speed ability fatigue index. Timepoint: Pre-test (before intervention) and post-test (immediately after 2 minutes of rest following the intervention). Method of measurement: Calculated using the formula: [(Total time / Ideal time) - 1] × 100. Ideal time was defined as the fastest sprint time multiplied by six. The result was reported as a percentage (%).;10m linear sprint. Timepoint: Pre-test (before intervention) and post-test (immediately after 2 minutes of rest following the intervention). Method of measurement: Timing gates were positioned at the start line and the 10-meter mark. The participant began from a stationary upright two-point staggered start with the front foot placed 0.5 m behind the start gate to prevent premature triggering. Time was recorded in seconds. Participants	—

Measure

Time frame

Agility. Timepoint: Pre-test (before intervention) and post-test (immediately after 2 minutes of rest following the intervention). Method of measurement: Timing gates (Speedlight, Swift Performance, Australia) placed at hip height (0.7 m) to align with the center of mass at the start/finish line. The participant began from a stationary two-point staggered stance with the front foot placed 0.5 m behind the start gate to prevent premature triggering. Time was recorded in seconds. Participants completed two maximal efforts with 2 minutes of passive recovery between attempts. The best (fastest) completion time was recorded.;Repetetive speed ability total time. Timepoint: Pre-test (before intervention) and post-test (immediately after 2 minutes of rest following the intervention). Method of measurement: Six bouts of 10-meter sprints (including 5 meters straight and 5 meters with a 45° cut) with 25 seconds of passive recovery between each bout. Standing start. Timing gates (Speedlight, Swift Performance, Australia) were positioned at the start line (0 m) and the finish line (10 m total distance). Total time was calculated as the sum of all six sprint times and recorded in seconds.;Repetetive speed ability fatigue index. Timepoint: Pre-test (before intervention) and post-test (immediately after 2 minutes of rest following the intervention). Method of measurement: Calculated using the formula: [(Total time / Ideal time) - 1] × 100. Ideal time was defined as the fastest sprint time multiplied by six. The result was reported as a percentage (%).;10m linear sprint. Timepoint: Pre-test (before intervention) and post-test (immediately after 2 minutes of rest following the intervention). Method of measurement: Timing gates were positioned at the start line and the 10-meter mark. The participant began from a stationary upright two-point staggered start with the front foot placed 0.5 m behind the start gate to prevent premature triggering. Time was recorded in seconds. Participants

—

Countries

Iran (Islamic Republic of)

Contacts

Public ContactMohammad Alimoradi

Shahid Bahonar University

malimoradisport@gmail.com+98 34 2250 1685

Outcome results

None listed

Source: IRCT (via WHO ICTRP) · Data processed: Jul 13, 2026