Skip to content

Comparison of Immediate Effects of Foam Rolling and Dynamic Stretching to Only Dynamic Stretching on Flexibility, Balance, and Agility in Male Soccer Players.

PMID 34544904 (2022): stretch, stretching — Injury risk (study note for endurance athletes).

Last updated/Feb 23, 2026, 10:34 PM

Study note • PMID 34544904

Comparison of Immediate Effects of Foam Rolling and Dynamic Stretching to Only Dynamic Stretching on Flexibility, Balance, and Agility in Male Soccer Players.

Journal of sport rehabilitation2022 • DOI 10.1123/jsr.2021-0017
Evidence C67/100
Action 2: Consider

Worth trying if it fits your goal and context.

ELI5

In plain language

CONTEXT: Dynamic stretching (DS) is typically suggested during warm-up protocols. (randomized trial; participants).

The abstract doesn’t indicate a clear change in Injury risk under the tested conditions. Treat this as a signal, not a guarantee; confirm methods and context in the full paper.

Takeaways

What the abstract suggests

  • Study question: CONTEXT: Dynamic stretching (DS) is typically suggested during warm-up protocols.
  • The abstract doesn’t indicate a clear change in Injury risk under the tested conditions.
  • Population: participants.
  • Protocol cues (title/abstract): 72 hours.

Protocol

Protocol (as reported)

  • Intervention/exposure: stretch, stretching (vs comparison group).
  • Dose/time/duration cues in abstract/title: 72 hours.
  • Outcomes: Injury risk.
  • Replication note: abstracts often omit adherence and timing; confirm details before changing training or supplementation.

Fit

Who it helps, and who should skip it

Who it helps

  • Athletes similar to the study population (participants) working on mobility.
  • Athletes who can measure Injury risk with a repeatable workout or time-trial effort.

Who should skip

  • If you have symptoms or conditions that make the intervention risky, get professional guidance.
  • If you’re near race day and can’t safely test, defer the experiment.

Methods

What the study actually did

  • Design: randomized trial.
  • Population: participants.
  • Comparator: comparison group.
  • Outcomes measured: Injury risk.
  • Protocol cues mentioned: 72 hours.
  • Source: PubMed PMID 34544904 (2022) — Journal of sport rehabilitation.

Results excerpt

What the abstract reports

DS + FR was not superior to DS at improving flexibility and agility as compared only with DS.

Note: excerpts are short; for full context, read the paper.

Limits

Limitations & bias

  • Abstract-only summaries can miss critical details (population, protocol, adherence, and context).
  • Single studies often don’t generalize to your event, history, and training load; treat results as a starting point.
  • If your context differs (elite vs recreational; cycling vs running), adjust expectations and be conservative.
  • This is performance information, not medical advice.

Coaching beta

Get a plan that adapts to your life.

Join the 26weeks.ai TestFlight beta for adaptive coaching, recovery-aware adjustments, and race-week reminders.

Keep going

Sources