Yıldırım M S, Ozyurek S, Tosun Oç, Uzer S, Gelecek N
Dokuz Eylül University, School of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation, Turkey.
Biol Sport. 2016 Mar;33(1):89-94. doi: 10.5604/20831862.1194126. Epub 2016 Feb 8.
The aim of this study was to compare the effects of static stretching, proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation (PNF) stretching and Mulligan technique on hip flexion range of motion (ROM) in subjects with bilateral hamstring tightness. A total of 40 students (mean age: 21.5±1.3 years, mean body height: 172.8±8.2 cm, mean body mass index: 21.9±3.0 kg · m(-2)) with bilateral hamstring tightness were enrolled in this randomized trial, of whom 26 completed the study. Subjects were divided into 4 groups performing (I) typical static stretching, (II) PNF stretching, (III) Mulligan traction straight leg raise (TSLR) technique, (IV) no intervention. Hip flexion ROM was measured using a digital goniometer with the passive straight leg raise test before and after 4 weeks by two physiotherapists blinded to the groups. 52 extremities of 26 subjects were analyzed. Hip flexion ROM increased in all three intervention groups (p<0.05) but not in the no-intervention group after 4 weeks. A statistically significant change in initial-final assessment differences of hip flexion ROM was found between groups (p<0.001) in favour of PNF stretching and Mulligan TSLR technique in comparison to typical static stretching (p=0.016 and p=0.02, respectively). No significant difference was found between Mulligan TSLR technique and PNF stretching (p=0.920). The initial-final assessment difference of hip flexion ROM was similar in typical static stretching and no intervention (p=0.491). A 4-week stretching intervention is beneficial for increasing hip flexion ROM in bilateral hamstring tightness. However, PNF stretching and Mulligan TSLR technique are superior to typical static stretching. These two interventions can be alternatively used for stretching in hamstring tightness.
本研究旨在比较静态拉伸、本体感觉神经肌肉促进法(PNF)拉伸和Mulligan技术对双侧腘绳肌紧张受试者髋关节屈曲活动度(ROM)的影响。共有40名双侧腘绳肌紧张的学生(平均年龄:21.5±1.3岁,平均身高:172.8±8.2 cm,平均体重指数:21.9±3.0 kg·m⁻²)参与了这项随机试验,其中26人完成了研究。受试者被分为4组,分别进行(I)典型静态拉伸、(II)PNF拉伸、(III)Mulligan牵引直腿抬高(TSLR)技术、(IV)不干预。在4周前后,由两名对分组情况不知情的物理治疗师使用数字角度计通过被动直腿抬高试验测量髋关节屈曲ROM。对26名受试者的52个肢体进行了分析。4周后,所有三个干预组的髋关节屈曲ROM均增加(p<0.05),而不干预组未增加。与典型静态拉伸相比,PNF拉伸和Mulligan TSLR技术在髋关节屈曲ROM初始-最终评估差异方面存在组间统计学显著变化(p<0.001)(分别为p=0.016和p=0.02)。Mulligan TSLR技术与PNF拉伸之间未发现显著差异(p=0.920)。典型静态拉伸和不干预在髋关节屈曲ROM初始-最终评估差异方面相似(p=0.491)。为期4周的拉伸干预有利于增加双侧腘绳肌紧张患者的髋关节屈曲ROM。然而,PNF拉伸和Mulligan TSLR技术优于典型静态拉伸。这两种干预方法可交替用于腘绳肌紧张的拉伸。