Acute and chronic effects of static stretching at 100% versus 120% intensity on flexibility

The Effects of 5 Minutes of Static Stretching on Joint Flexibility and Muscle Strength Are Comparable Between Ballet Dancers and Non-Dancers

Introduction: Ballet dancers have a special morphology, such as a large muscle thickness that affects passive torque. Ballet dancers also possess specialized mechanical, and neural properties of muscles and tendons. These characteristics may produce different static stretching effects than non-dancers. Therefore, this study aimed to determine the differences in the effects of static stretching on joint range of motion, passive torque, and muscle strength between ballet dancers and non-dancers. Methods: This study included 13 ballet dancers and 13 college students. The muscle and tendon thicknesses were assessed using ultrasonography. In the right lower extremity, torque-angle data and muscle-tendon junction displacement measurements were obtained during isokinetic passive dorsiflexion before and after a 5-minute static stretch against the right plantar flexors. The relative stretching intensity was calculated by dividing the stretching angle by the maximal dorsiflexion angle pre-stretch. Additionally, the isometric maximal voluntary plantar flexion torque on the left ankle was measured before and after 5 minutes of static stretching against the left plantar flexors. Results: Ballet dancers had significantly greater muscle thickness than non-dancers (22.4 ± 2.2 vs 18.1 ± 1.7 mm), whereas no significant difference was observed in the Achilles tendon thickness. No significant difference was observed in the stretching angle; however, the relative stretching intensity was higher in the control group (65.9 ± 19.8 vs 127.5 ± 63.8%). Static stretching increased the maximal dorsiflexion angle (dancer: 30.4° ± 9.6° to 33.9° ± 9.5°, non-dancer: 18.4° ± 8.6° to 20.5° ± 9.5°) and maximal passive torque in both groups, whereas the maximal isometric plantar flexion torque and submaximal passive torque decreased. However, no significant differences were observed in the changes between the groups. Conclusion: These results indicate that despite having a lower relative stretching intensity, ballet dancers experienced similar changes as non-dancers after 5 minutes of static stretching.

What We Do Not Know About Stretching in Healthy Athletes: A Scoping Review with Evidence Gap Map from 300 Trials

BACKGROUND

Stretching has garnered significant attention in sports sciences, resulting in numerous studies. However, there is no comprehensive overview on investigation of stretching in healthy athletes.

OBJECTIVES

To perform a systematic scoping review with an evidence gap map of stretching studies in healthy athletes, identify current gaps in the literature, and provide stakeholders with priorities for future research.

METHODS

Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 and PRISMA-ScR guidelines were followed. We included studies comprising healthy athletes exposed to acute and/or chronic stretching interventions. Six databases were searched (CINAHL, EMBASE, PubMed, Scopus, SPORTDiscus, and Web of Science) until 1 January 2023. The relevant data were narratively synthesized; quantitative data summaries were provided for key data items. An evidence gap map was developed to offer an overview of the existing research and relevant gaps.

RESULTS

Of ~ 220,000 screened records, we included 300 trials involving 7080 athletes [mostly males (~ 65% versus ~ 20% female, and ~ 15% unreported) under 36 years of age; tiers 2 and 3 of the Participant Classification Framework] across 43 sports. Sports requiring extreme range of motion (e.g., gymnastics) were underrepresented. Most trials assessed the acute effects of stretching, with chronic effects being scrutinized in less than 20% of trials. Chronic interventions averaged 7.4 ± 5.1 weeks and never exceeded 6 months. Most trials (~ 85%) implemented stretching within the warm-up, with other application timings (e.g., post-exercise) being under-researched. Most trials examined static active stretching (62.3%), followed by dynamic stretching (38.3%) and proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation (PNF) stretching (12.0%), with scarce research on alternative methods (e.g., ballistic stretching). Comparators were mostly limited to passive controls, with ~ 25% of trials including active controls (e.g., strength training). The lower limbs were primarily targeted by interventions (~ 75%). Reporting of dose was heterogeneous in style (e.g., 10 repetitions versus 10 s for dynamic stretching) and completeness of information (i.e., with disparities in the comprehensiveness of the provided information). Most trials (~ 90%) reported performance-related outcomes (mainly strength/power and range of motion); sport-specific outcomes were collected in less than 15% of trials. Biomechanical, physiological, and neural/psychological outcomes were assessed sparsely and heterogeneously; only five trials investigated injury-related outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

There is room for improvement, with many areas of research on stretching being underexplored and others currently too heterogeneous for reliable comparisons between studies. There is limited representation of elite-level athletes (~ 5% tier 4 and no tier 5) and underpowered sample sizes (≤ 20 participants). Research was biased toward adult male athletes of sports not requiring extreme ranges of motion, and mostly assessed the acute effects of static active stretching and dynamic stretching during the warm-up. Dose-response relationships remain largely underexplored. Outcomes were mostly limited to general performance testing. Injury prevention and other effects of stretching remain poorly investigated. These relevant research gaps should be prioritized by funding policies.

REGISTRATION

OSF project ( https://osf.io/6auyj/ ) and registration ( https://osf.io/gu8ya ).

Chronic effects of stretching on range of motion with consideration of potential moderating variables: A systematic review with meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

It is well known that stretch training can induce prolonged increases in joint range of motion (ROM). However, to date more information is needed regarding which training variables might have greater influence on improvements in flexibility. Thus, the purpose of this meta-analysis was to investigate the effects of stretch training on ROM in healthy participants by considering potential moderating variables, such as stretching technique, intensity, duration, frequency, and muscles stretched, as well as sex-specific, age-specific, and/or trained state-specific adaptations to stretch training.

METHODS

We searched through PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and SportDiscus to find eligible studies and, finally, assessed the results from 77 studies and 186 effect sizes by applying a random-effect meta-analysis. Moreover, by applying a mixed-effect model, we performed the respective subgroup analyses. To find potential relationships between stretch duration or age and effect sizes, we performed a meta-regression.

RESULTS

We found a significant overall effect, indicating that stretch training can increase ROM with a moderate effect compared to the controls (effect size = -1.002; Z = -12.074; 95% confidence interval: -1.165 to -0.840; p < 0.001; I2 = 74.97). Subgroup analysis showed a significant difference between the stretching techniques (p = 0.01) indicating that proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation and static stretching produced greater ROM than did ballistic/dynamic stretching. Moreover, there was a significant effect between the sexes (p = 0.04), indicating that females showed higher gains in ROM compared to males. However, further moderating analysis showed no significant relation or difference.

CONCLUSION

When the goal is to maximize ROM in the long term, proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation or static stretching, rather than ballistic/dynamic stretching, should be applied. Something to consider in future research as well as sports practice is that neither volume, intensity, nor frequency of stretching were found to play a significant role in ROM yields.

Acute effects of static stretching on passive stiffness in older adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Static stretching has been demonstrated to improve the health of older adults. One of its goals is to decrease passive stiffness of the muscle-tendon unit (MTU) and/or muscles. Decreased passive stiffness in older adults could increase the range of motion and movement efficiency. Herein, we conducted a meta-analysis of the acute effects of static stretching on passive stiffness in older adults as well as a meta-analysis of differences in these effects between older and young adults.

BACKGROUND

PubMed, Web of Science, and EBSCO were searched for studies published before June 28, 2023. Manual searches were performed to identify additional studies. All included studies were critically reviewed by five authors. Meta-analyses of muscle and tendon injuries were performed using a random effect model. Of 4643 identified studies, 6 studies were included in the systematic review.

RESULTS

The main meta-analysis in older adults showed that static stretching could decrease the passive stiffness of the MTU or muscles (effect size, 0.55; 95 % confidence interval, 0.27 to 0.84; p < 0.01; and I2 = 0.0 %). Moreover, for the comparison between young and old adults, three studies were included in the meta-analysis. The results revealed no significant difference in the effects of static stretching interventions on stiffness between older and young adults (effect size, 0.136; 95 % confidence interval, -0.301 to 0.5738; p = 0.541; and I2 = 17.4 %). Static stretching could decrease the passive stiffness of the MTU and/or muscles in older adults to a small magnitude, and the effects were comparable between older and young adults.

Acute Effects of Various Stretching Techniques on Range of Motion: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis

Background

Although stretching can acutely increase joint range of motion (ROM), there are a variety of factors which could influence the extent of stretch-induced flexibility such as participant characteristics, stretching intensities, durations, type (technique), and muscle or joint tested.

Objective

The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to investigate the acute effects of stretching on ROM including moderating variables such as muscles tested, stretch techniques, intensity, sex, and trained state.

Methods

A random-effect meta-analysis was performed from 47 eligible studies (110 effect sizes). A mixed-effect meta-analysis subgroup analysis was also performed on the moderating variables. A meta-regression was also performed between age and stretch duration. GRADE analysis was used to assess the quality of evidence obtained from this meta-analysis.

Results

The meta-analysis revealed a small ROM standard mean difference in favor of an acute bout of stretching compared to non-active control condition (ES = −0.555; Z = −8.939; CI (95%) −0.677 to −0.434; p  < 0.001; I2 = 33.32). While there were ROM increases with sit and reach (P  = 0.038), hamstrings (P  < 0.001), and triceps surae (P  = 0.002) tests, there was no change with the hip adductor test (P  = 0.403). Further subgroup analyses revealed no significant difference in stretch intensity (P  = 0.76), trained state (P  = 0.99), stretching techniques (P  = 0.72), and sex (P  = 0.89). Finally, meta-regression showed no relationship between the ROM standard mean differences to age (R2 = −0.03; P  = 0.56) and stretch duration (R 2 = 0.00; P  = 0.39), respectively. GRADE analysis indicated that we can be moderately confident in the effect estimates.

Conclusion

A single bout of stretching can be considered effective for providing acute small magnitude ROM improvements for most ROM tests, which are not significantly affected by stretch intensity, participants’ trained state, stretching techniques, and sex.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40798-023-00652-x.

The meta-analysis on joint range of motion (ROM) increases revealed a small effect size in favor of an acute bout of stretching compared to the control condition. Subgroup analysis revealed a significant increase in ROM with sit and reach, hamstrings, and triceps surae tests, but no improvement with the hip adductor tests. Whereas all moderating variables presented significant increases in ROM, further subgroup analyses revealed no significant difference in ROM gains with the stretch intensity, trained state of the participants, stretching techniques, and sex. A meta-regression showed no relationship between the effect sizes to age and stretch duration, respectively.

Acute and Long-Term Effects of Static Stretching on Muscle-Tendon Unit Stiffness: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Static stretching can increase the range of motion of a joint. Muscle-tendon unit stiffness (MTS) is potentially one of the main factors that influences the change in the range of motion after static stretching. However, to date, the effects of acute and long-term static stretching on MTS are not well understood. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to investigate the effects of acute and long-term static stretching training on MTS, in young healthy participants. PubMed, Web of Science, and EBSCO published before January 6, 2023, were searched and finally, 17 papers were included in the meta-analysis. Main meta-analysis was performed with a random-effect model and subgroup analyses, which included comparisons of sex (male vs. mixed sex and female) and muscle (hamstrings vs. plantar flexors) were also performed. Furthermore, a meta-regression was conducted to examine the effect of total stretching duration on MTS. For acute static stretching, the result of the meta-analysis showed a moderate decrease in MTS (effect size = -0.772, Z = -2.374, 95% confidence interval = -1.409 - -0.325, p = 0.018, I2 = 79.098). For long-term static stretching, there is no significant change in MTS (effect size = -0.608, Z = -1.761, 95% CI = -1.284 - 0.069, p = 0.078, I2 = 83.061). Subgroup analyses revealed no significant differences between sex (long-term, p = 0.209) or muscle (acute, p =0.295; long-term, p = 0.427). Moreover, there was a significant relationship between total stretching duration and MTS in acute static stretching (p = 0.011, R2 = 0.28), but not in long-term stretching (p = 0.085, R2 < 0.01). Whilst MTS decreased after acute static stretching, only a tendency of a decrease was seen after long-term stretching.

Long-term static stretching can decrease muscle stiffness: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Stretch training increases the range of motion of a joint. However, to date, the mechanisms behind such a stretching effect are not well understood. An earlier meta-analysis on several studies reported no changes in the passive properties of a muscle (i.e., muscle stiffness) following long-term stretch training with various types of stretching (static, dynamic, and proprioceptive neuromuscular stretching). However, in recent years, an increasing number of papers have reported the effects of long-term static stretching on muscle stiffness. The purpose of the present study was to examine the long-term (≥2 weeks) effect of static stretching training on muscle stiffness. PubMed, Web of Science, and EBSCO published before December 28, 2022, were searched and 10 papers met the inclusion criteria for meta-analysis. By applying a mixed-effect model, subgroup analyses, which included comparisons of sex (male vs. mixed sex) and type of muscle stiffness assessment (calculated from the muscle-tendon junction vs. shear modulus), were performed. Furthermore, a meta-regression was conducted to examine the effect of total stretching duration on muscle stiffness. The result of the meta-analysis showed a moderate decrease in muscle stiffness after 3-12 weeks of static stretch training compared to a control condition (effect size = -0.749, p < 0.001, I2  = 56.245). Subgroup analyses revealed no significant differences between sex (p = 0.131) and type of muscle stiffness assessment (p = 0.813). Moreover, there was no significant relationship between total stretching duration and muscle stiffness (p = 0.881).

The Effects of Static Stretching Intensity on Range of Motion and Strength: A Systematic Review

The aim of this study was to systematically review the evidence on the outcomes of using different intensities of static stretching on range of motion (ROM) and strength. PubMed, Web of Science and Cochrane controlled trials databases were searched between October 2021 and February 2022 for studies that examined the effects of different static stretching intensities on range of motion and strength. Out of 6285 identified records, 18 studies were included in the review. Sixteen studies examined outcomes on ROM and four on strength (two studies included outcomes on both ROM and strength). All studies demonstrated that static stretching increased ROM; however, eight studies demonstrated that higher static stretching intensities led to larger increases in ROM. Two of the four studies demonstrated that strength decreased more following higher intensity stretching versus lower intensity stretching. It appears that higher intensity static stretching above the point of discomfort and pain may lead to greater increases in ROM, but further research is needed to confirm this. It is unclear if high-intensity static stretching leads to a larger acute decrease in strength than lower intensity static stretching.

Combined Static Stretching and Electrical Muscle Stimulation Induce Greater Changes in Range of Motion, Passive Torque, and Tendon Displacement Compared with Static Stretching

The purpose of this study was to determine the combined effects of static stretching and electrical muscle stimulation on maximal dorsiflexion angle and passive properties. Sixteen healthy subjects participated in three randomly ordered experimental trials: combined static stretching and electrical muscle stimulation, static stretching alone, and control. In combined trial, subjects performed 5 min of calf stretching while receiving electrical muscle stimulation of the gastrocnemius medialis. In static stretching trial, subjects performed calf stretching only. Maximal dorsiflexion angle, passive torque, and muscle displacement were measured before and after intervention. Tendon displacement was also calculated. The difference from pre- to post-intervention in maximal dorsiflexion angle in combined trial was greater compared with that in the control (p = 0.026), but the static stretching trial exhibited no significant difference (both p > 0.05). Passive torque at submaximal dorsiflexion angles was significantly decreased only after combined trial (all p < 0.05). Muscle displacement at maximal dorsiflexion angle was significantly increased in all conditions (all p < 0.05). Tendon displacement at maximal dorsiflexion angle was higher after combined trial compared with static stretching trial (p = 0.030). These results revealed additional effects of adding electrical muscle stimulation to static stretching on maximal dorsiflexion angle, passive torque, and tendon displacement.

Acute Effects of Different Intensity and Duration of Static Stretching on the Muscle-Tendon Unit Stiffness of the Hamstrings

The effects of static stretching are influenced by prescribed and applied loads of stretching. The prescribed load is calculated from the stretching duration and intensity, whereas the applied load is assessed from the force of static stretching exerted on the targeted muscle. No previous study has investigated the prescribed and applied loads of static stretching on the muscle-tendon unit stiffness simultaneously. Therefore, the purpose of the present study was to examine the acute effects of the prescribed and applied load of static stretching on the change in the muscle-tendon unit stiffness of the hamstrings by using different intensities and durations of static stretching. Twenty-three participants underwent static stretching at the intensity of high (50 seconds, 3 sets), moderate (60 seconds, 3 sets), and low (75 seconds, 3 sets), in random order. The parameters were the range of motion, passive torque, and muscle-tendon unit stiffness. These parameters were measured before stretching, between sets, and immediately after stretching by using a dynamometer machine. The static stretching load was calculated from the passive torque during static stretching. The muscle-tendon unit stiffness decreased in high- and moderate-intensity after 50 (p < 0.01, d = -0.73) and 180 seconds (p < 0.01, d = -1.10) of stretching respectively, but there was no change in low-intensity stretching for 225 seconds (p = 0.48, d = -0.18). There were significant correlations between the static stretching load and relative change in the muscle-tendon unit stiffness in moderate- (r = -0.64, p < 0.01) and low-intensity (r = -0.54, p < 0.01), but not in high-intensity (r = -0.16, p = 0.18). High-intensity static stretching was effective for a decrease in the muscle-tendon unit stiffness even when the prescribed load of static stretching was unified. The applied load of static stretching was an important factor in decreasing the muscle-tendon unit stiffness in low- and moderate-intensity static stretching, but not in high-intensity stretching.

Changes in stiffness of the specific regions of knee extensor mechanism after static stretching

Decreased muscle stiffness could reduce musculotendinous injury risk in sports and rehabilitation settings. Static stretching (SS) has been used to increase the flexibility of muscles and reduce muscle stiffness, but the effects of SS on the stiffness of specific regions of the knee extensor mechanism are unclear. The quadriceps femoris and patellar tendon are essential components of the knee extensor mechanism and play an important role in knee motion. Therefore, we explored the acute and prolonged effects of SS on the stiffness of the quadriceps femoris and patellar tendon and knee flexion range of motion (ROM). Thirty healthy male subjects participated in the study. Three 60-s SS with 30-s intervals were conducted in right knee flexion with 30° hip extension. We measured the ROM and stiffness of the vastus medialis (VM), vastus lateralis (VL), and rectus femoris (RF) and the proximal-(PPT), middle-(MPT), and distal-(DPT) region stiffness of the patellar tendon before and immediately after SS intervention, or 5 and 10 min after SS. The stiffness of the quadriceps muscle and patellar tendon were measured using MyotonPRO, and the knee flexion ROM was evaluated using a medical goniometer. Our outcomes showed that the ROM was increased after SS intervention in all-time conditions (p < 0.01). Additionally, the results showed that the stiffness of RF (p < 0.01) and PPT (p = 0.03) were decreased immediately after SS intervention. These results suggested that SS intervention could be useful to increase knee flexion ROM and temporarily reduce the stiffness of specific regions of the knee extensor mechanism.

Comparison Between High- and Low-Intensity Static Stretching Training Program on Active and Passive Properties of Plantar Flexors

The purpose of this study was to compare two static stretching (SS) training programs at high-intensity (HI-SS) and low-intensity (LI-SS) on passive and active properties of the plantar flexor muscles. Forty healthy young men were randomly allocated into three groups: HI-SS intervention group (n = 14), LI-SS intervention group (n = 13), and non-intervention control group (n = 13). An 11-point numerical scale (0–10; none to very painful stretching) was used to determine SS intensity. HI-SS and LI-SS stretched at 6–7 and 0–1 intensities, respectively, both in 3 sets of 60 s, 3×/week, for 4 weeks. Dorsiflexion range of motion (ROM), gastrocnemius muscle stiffness, muscle strength, drop jump height, and muscle architecture were assessed before and after SS training program. The HI-SS group improved more than LI-SS in ROM (40 vs. 15%) and decreased muscle stiffness (−57 vs. −24%), while no significant change was observed for muscle strength, drop jump height, and muscle architecture in both groups. The control group presented no significant change in any variable. Performing HI-SS is more effective than LI-SS for increasing ROM and decreasing muscle stiffness of plantar flexor muscles following a 4-week training period in young men. However, SS may not increase muscle strength or hypertrophy, regardless of the stretching discomfort intensity.

Effects of Intermittent and Continuous Static Stretching on Range of Motion and Musculotendinous Viscoelastic Properties Based on a Duration-Matched Protocol

The different effects of intermittent and continuous stretching on the mechanical properties of the musculotendinous complex have been unclear. This study aimed to compare the effects of intermittent and continuous stretching for the same duration on the range of motion (ROM), passive resistive torque (PRT), and musculotendinous stiffness (MTS) of ankle plantar flexors. Eighteen healthy young men participated in the study. Intermittent (four sets × 30 s) and continuous stretching (one set × 120 s) were performed in random orders on two separate days. Both stretching protocols were conducted using a dynamometer with a constant torque applied. ROM and PRT were determined using a dynamometer, and MTS was calculated using the torque-angle relationship measured before and after stretching. Two-way repeated measures analysis of variance was performed for all parameters. Both intermittent and continuous stretching significantly increased ROM and decreased PRT and MTS (p < 0.05). Intermittent stretching led to greater changes in ROM and PRT than continuous stretching. However, the reduction in MTS did not differ between the two conditions. These results suggest that intermittent stretching is more effective in increasing ROM and changing the mechanical properties of the musculotendinous complex.

Effects of hot pack application before high-intensity stretching on the quadriceps muscle

Background/aims

High-intensity static stretching is assumed to increase the range of motion and/or decrease muscle stiffness; however, the effects of high-intensity static stretching on the quadriceps muscle have been debated. Hot pack application before high-intensity static stretching was assumed to decrease stretching pain, which is the main problem in high-intensity static stretching, and decrease quadriceps muscle stiffness. This study aimed to examine hot pack application before high-intensity static stretching on stretching pain, knee flexion range of motion, and quadriceps muscle stiffness.

Methods

In total, 21 healthy sedentary male participants randomly performed two interventions: high-intensity static stretching and hot pack application before stretching. Static stretching was performed at three 60-second stretching interventions with a 30-second interval. Then, a 20-minute hot pack was applied before high-intensity static stretching. The knee flexion range of motion and shear elastic modulus of the quadriceps muscle were measured by ultrasonic shear-wave elastography before and after the static stretching intervention.

Results

Stretching pain after hot pack application before stretching was lower than high-intensity static stretching alone. Significant increases were also found in knee flexion range of motion after both stretching interventions, but no significant difference was noted in the increase in the knee flexion range of motion with or without hot pack application. No significant change was found in quadriceps muscle stiffness in either intervention.

Conclusions

The results suggest that hot pack application before high-intensity static stretching could decrease stretching pain, but no significant difference in knee flexion range of motion increase was found.

Time course of changes in the range of motion and muscle-tendon unit stiffness of the hamstrings after two different intensities of static stretching

Objectives

The purpose of this study was to examine the time course of changes in the range of motion and muscle-tendon unit stiffness of the hamstrings after two different intensities of static stretching.

Methods

Fourteen healthy men (20.9 ± 0.7 years, 169.1 ± 7.5cm, 61.6 ± 6.5kg) received static stretching for 60 seconds at two different intensities based on the point of discomfort (100%POD and 120%POD) of each participant, in random order. To evaluate the time course of changes in the flexibility of the hamstrings, the knee extension range of motion (ROM), passive torque at end ROM, and muscle-tendon unit stiffness were measured pre-stretching, post-stretching, and at both 10 and 20 minutes after static stretching.

Results

For both intensities, ROM and passive torque at pre-stretching were significantly smaller than those at post-stretching (p < 0.01 in both intensities), 10 minutes (p < 0.01 in both intensities), and 20 minutes (p < 0.01 in both intensities). The muscle-tendon unit stiffness at pre-stretching was significantly higher than that at post-stretching (p < 0.01), 10 minutes (p < 0.01), and 20 minutes (p < 0.01) only in the 120%POD, but it showed no change in the 100%POD.

Conclusion

The results showed that ROM and passive torque increased in both intensities, and the effects continued for at least 20 minutes after stretching regardless of stretching intensity. However, the muscle-tendon unit stiffness of the hamstrings decreased only after static stretching at the intensity of 120%POD, and the effects continued for at least 20 minutes after stretching.

The Comparison of Different Stretching Intensities on the Range of Motion and Muscle Stiffness of the Quadriceps Muscles

Muscle strain is one of the most frequent sports injuries, having the rectus femoris (RF) muscle as the reported preferred site of quadriceps muscle strain. The decrease muscle stiffness could be an effective RF muscle strain prevention. In recent studies, a high-intensity static stretching intervention decreased passive stiffness, though no study has investigated on the effect of the different static stretching intervention intensities on quadriceps muscle stiffness. The purpose of this study was to investigate the three different quadriceps muscle stiffness intensities (120 vs. 100 vs. 80%). Eighteen healthy, sedentary male volunteers participated in the study and randomly performed three intensities. The static stretching intervention was performed in knee flexion with 30° hip extension. Three 60-second stretching intervention with a 30-second interval were performed at each stretching intensity. We measured knee flexion range of motion and shear elastic modulus of the RF muscle used by ultrasonic shear-wave elastography before and after the static stretching intervention. Our results showed that the knee flexion range of motion was increased after 100% (p < 0.01) and 120% intensities (p < 0.01) static stretching intervention, not in 80% intensity (p = 0.853). In addition, our results showed that the shear elastic modulus of the RF muscle was decreased only after 100% intensity static stretching intervention (p < 0.01), not after 80% (p = 0.365), and 120% intensities (p = 0.743). To prevent the quadriceps muscle strain, especially the RF muscle, 100%, not 120% (high) and 80% (low), intensity stretching could be beneficial in sports setting application.