Draper David O, Miner Lisa, Knight Kenneth L, Ricard Mark D
Brigham Young University, Provo, UT.
J Athl Train. 2002 Mar;37(1):37-42.
To compare the effects of low-load, short-duration stretching with or without high-intensity, pulsed short-wave diathermy on hamstring flexibility. DESIGN AND SETTING: We used a single-blind, repeated-measures design (pretest and posttest for all treatments) that included a placebo. The 3 independent variables were treatment mode, pretest and posttest measurements, and day. Treatment mode had 3 levels: diathermy and stretching, stretching alone, and control. The dependent variable was range of motion. Subjects were randomly assigned to the diathermy and stretching, stretching-only, or control group. Subjects were treated and tested each day (at approximately the same time) for 5 days, with a follow-up test administered 72 hours later. Hamstring flexibility was tested using a sit-and-reach box before and after each treatment. Diathermy and stretching subjects received a 15-minute diathermy treatment on the right hamstring at a setting of 7000 pulses per second, with an average pulse width of 95 μsec. Stretching-only subjects received a 15-minute sham diathermy treatment. Both diathermy and stretching and stretching-only subjects then performed three 30-second stretches (short duration) before being retested. Control subjects lay prone for 15 minutes before being retested. SUBJECTS: Thirty-seven healthy college students (11 men, 26 women, age = 20.46 +/- 1.74 years) volunteered. MEASUREMENTS: Hamstring flexibility was measured using a sit-and-reach box before and after each treatment. RESULTS: The average increases in hamstring flexibility over the 5 treatment days for the diathermy and stretching, stretching-only, and control groups were 6.06 cm (19.6%), 5.27 cm (19.7%), and 3.38 cm (10.4%), respectively. Three days later (after no treatment), the values for the diathermy and stretching, stretching-only, and control groups were 8.27 cm (26.7%), 6.83 cm (25.3%), and 4.15 cm (14.2%), respectively. No significant differences in hamstring flexibility were noted among the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Diathermy and short-duration stretching were no more effective than short-duration stretching alone at increasing hamstring flexibility. The effects of diathermy with longer stretching times need to be researched.
比较低负荷、短时间拉伸联合或不联合高强度脉冲短波透热疗法对腘绳肌柔韧性的影响。
我们采用单盲、重复测量设计（所有治疗均进行预测试和后测试），并设置了安慰剂组。3个自变量为治疗方式、预测试和后测试测量以及日期。治疗方式有3个水平：透热疗法与拉伸、单纯拉伸、对照组。因变量为活动范围。受试者被随机分配到透热疗法与拉伸组、单纯拉伸组或对照组。受试者每天（大致在同一时间）接受治疗和测试，持续5天，72小时后进行随访测试。每次治疗前后使用坐位体前屈箱测试腘绳肌柔韧性。透热疗法与拉伸组的受试者在右侧腘绳肌接受15分钟的透热疗法治疗，设置为每秒7000个脉冲，平均脉冲宽度为95微秒。单纯拉伸组的受试者接受15分钟的假透热疗法治疗。透热疗法与拉伸组和单纯拉伸组的受试者随后在重新测试前进行三次30秒的拉伸（短时间）。对照组受试者在重新测试前俯卧15分钟。
37名健康大学生（11名男性，26名女性，年龄 = 20.46 ± 1.74岁）自愿参与。
每次治疗前后使用坐位体前屈箱测量腘绳肌柔韧性。
透热疗法与拉伸组、单纯拉伸组和对照组在5天治疗期间腘绳肌柔韧性的平均增加量分别为6.06厘米（19.6%）、5.27厘米（(19.7%）和3.38厘米（10.4%）。三天后（未进行治疗），透热疗法与拉伸组、单纯拉伸组和对照组的值分别为8.27厘米（26.7%）、6.83厘米（25.3%）和4.15厘米（14.2%）。各组之间在腘绳肌柔韧性方面未发现显著差异。
在增加腘绳肌柔韧性方面，透热疗法与短时间拉伸并不比单纯短时间拉伸更有效。需要研究更长拉伸时间的透热疗法的效果。
