Table 2. Effect of the physical education-based stretching program on hamstring extensibility (classic sit-and-reach scores, cm). Data are reported as means (±standard deviation).
| Group |
Pre-intervention
(1) |
Post-development
(2) |
Post-maintenance
(3) |
pa |
Effect sizeb |
| 1-2 |
2-3 |
1-3 |
| EG1 (n = 44) ## |
16.8 (5.4) |
19.5 (6.0) *** |
20.1 (5.6) *** |
<.001 |
.49 |
.03 |
.52 |
| EG2 (n = 51) # |
16.8 (5.5) |
19.1 (5.1) *** |
19.1 (5.0) *** |
|
.42 |
- .10 |
.33 |
| CG (n = 45) |
15.3 (5.2) |
15.4 (4.9) |
15.8 (5.7) |
|
.07 |
.13 |
.20 |
b Hedges’ g effect size. Rows from top to bottom: EG1-CG, EG2-CG, and EG1-EG2.
a Significance level from the two-way analysis of variance with the post hoc analyses with Bonferroni adjustment. Between-groups pairwise comparisons: Differences statistically significant from CG (# p < 0.05, ## p < 0.01). Within-groups pairwise comparisons: Change statistically significant from pre-intervention to post-development and from post-development to post-maintenance (*** p < 0.001);EG1, experimental group 1; EG2, experimental group 2; CG, control group;
