Human Movement and Function Laboratory, School of Health Professions, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, United Kingdom.
J Strength Cond Res. 2011 Jun;25(6):1586-91. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181df7f98.
A number of studies have investigated the efficacy of several repetitions of proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation stretching (PNF) and static stretching (SS). However, there is limited research comparing the effects of a single bout of these stretching maneuvers. The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of a single bout of a therapist-applied 30-second SS vs. a single bout of therapist-applied 6-second hamstring (agonist) contract PNF. Forty-five healthy subjects between the ages of 21 and 35 were randomly allocated to 1 of the 2 stretching groups or a control group, in which no stretching was received. The flexibility of the hamstring was determined by a range of passive knee extension, measured using a universal goniometer, with the subject in the supine position and the hip at 90° flexion, before and after intervention. A significant increase in knee extension was found for both intervention groups after a single stretch (SS group = 7.53°, p < 0.01 and PNF group = 11.80°, p < 0.01). Both interventions resulted in a significantly greater increase in knee extension when compared to the control group (p < 0.01). The PNF group demonstrated significantly greater gains in knee extension compared to the SS group (mean difference 4.27°, p < 0.01). It can be concluded that a therapist applied SS or PNF results in a significant increase in hamstring flexibility. A hamstring (agonist) contract PNF is more effective than an SS in a single stretching session. These findings are important to physiotherapists or trainers working in clinical and sporting environments. Where in the past therapists may have spent time conducting multiple repetitions of a PNF and an SS, a single bout of either technique may be considered just as effective. A key component of the study methodology was the exclusion of a warm-up period before stretching. Therefore, the findings of efficacy of a single PNF are of particular relevance in sporting environments and busy clinical settings where time may be limited.
许多研究已经调查了几种重复进行本体感受神经肌肉促进拉伸（PNF）和静态拉伸（SS）的功效。然而，比较这些拉伸技术单次效果的研究有限。本研究的目的是比较单次应用 30 秒 SS 与单次应用 6 秒腘绳肌（拮抗剂）收缩 PNF 的治疗师施加的拉伸动作的效果。45 名年龄在 21 至 35 岁之间的健康受试者被随机分配到 2 个拉伸组或对照组中的 1 个，对照组不接受拉伸。在干预前后，通过使用通用量角器测量仰卧位和髋关节屈曲 90°时的被动膝关节伸展范围来确定腘绳肌的柔韧性。在单次拉伸后，两组干预组的膝关节伸展度都显著增加（SS 组=7.53°，p<0.01 和 PNF 组=11.80°，p<0.01）。与对照组相比，两种干预措施都显著增加了膝关节伸展度（p<0.01）。与 SS 组相比，PNF 组的膝关节伸展度增加更为显著（平均差异 4.27°，p<0.01）。可以得出结论，治疗师施加的 SS 或 PNF 可显著增加腘绳肌柔韧性。在单次拉伸过程中，腘绳肌（拮抗剂）收缩 PNF 比 SS 更有效。这些发现对于在临床和运动环境中工作的物理治疗师或教练很重要。在过去，治疗师可能会花费时间进行多次 PNF 和 SS 的重复，现在单次使用任何一种技术都可能被认为同样有效。本研究方法的一个关键组成部分是在拉伸前不进行热身。因此，单次 PNF 有效性的发现对于时间有限的运动环境和繁忙的临床环境特别相关。
