Evidence Hub

Effects of sixteen weeks of two high-intensity flexibility training methods (dynamic versus static) on joint range of motion (ROM) in older adults: a comparative quasi-experimental study

Varejão RV, Dantas KBA, De Freitas FH, Araújo EdS, Pernambuco CS, Dantas EHM

2026

98 participants

Abstract

Abstract Background Aging progressively reduces joint range of motion (ROM), affecting functional autonomy and fall risk. It remains uncertain whether dynamic flexibility training, stick-assisted, differs from static mat-based flexibility training in ROM gains among older adults. This study compared the effects of sixteen weeks of two flexibility training methods on joint ROM in older adults. Methods Comparative quasi-experimental study (reported according to STROBE) with two non-randomized groups — Dynamic (stick-assisted) and Static (mat-based) — assessed at baseline and after 16 weeks (three sessions per week). ROM for nine movements was measured by goniometry following the LABIFIE protocol, and intensity was controlled by PERFLEX (scores 81–90). Normality was assessed with Shapiro-Wilk and homogeneity with baseline t-test and Levene’s test. Paired t-tests (and Wilcoxon when indicated) examined within-group changes; analyses between groups used analysis of covariance (ANCOVA, baseline as covariate), reporting partial η² and 95% CI; α = 0.05. Multiple comparisons were addressed with Benjamini–Hochberg (FDR), with Bonferroni as a conservative check. Results Complete paired data were analyzed for the Dynamic Group (n = 87) and the Static Group (n = 98). The Static Group showed significant gains in cervical rotation (Δ = +5.4°; p Conclusions After 16 weeks, static mat-based flexibility training was associated with ROM gains in cervical rotation and hip extension and was…

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free