Lim Kyoung-Il, Nam Hyung-Chun, Jung Kyoung-Sim
Department of Physical Therapy, Kyungbuk-College, Republic of Korea.
J Phys Ther Sci. 2014 Feb;26(2):209-13. doi: 10.1589/jpts.26.209. Epub 2014 Feb 28.
[Purpose] The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of two different stretching techniques on range of motion (ROM), muscle activation, and balance. [Subjects] For the present study, 48 adults with hamstring muscle tightness were recruited and randomly divided into three groups: a static stretching group (n=16), a PNF stretching group (n=16), a control group (n=16). [Methods] Both of the stretching techniques were applied to the hamstring once. Active knee extension angle, muscle activation during maximum voluntary isometric contraction (MVC), and static balance were measured before and after the application of each stretching technique. [Results] Both the static stretching and the PNF stretching groups showed significant increases in knee extension angle compared to the control group. However, there were no significant differences in muscle activation or balance between the groups. [Conclusion] Static stretching and PNF stretching techniques improved ROM without decrease in muscle activation, but neither of them exerted statistically significant effects on balance.
[目的] 本研究旨在探讨两种不同拉伸技术对关节活动范围(ROM)、肌肉激活和平衡的影响。[对象] 在本研究中,招募了48名腘绳肌紧张的成年人,并将其随机分为三组:静态拉伸组(n = 16)、本体感觉神经肌肉促进法(PNF)拉伸组(n = 16)、对照组(n = 16)。[方法] 两种拉伸技术均对腘绳肌应用一次。在每次应用拉伸技术前后,测量主动膝关节伸展角度、最大自主等长收缩(MVC)期间的肌肉激活以及静态平衡。[结果] 与对照组相比,静态拉伸组和PNF拉伸组的膝关节伸展角度均显著增加。然而,各组之间在肌肉激活或平衡方面没有显著差异。[结论] 静态拉伸和PNF拉伸技术改善了ROM,且肌肉激活没有降低,但两者对平衡均未产生统计学上的显著影响。