Thomas Ewan, Ficarra Salvatore, Scardina Antonino, Bellafiore Marianna, Palma Antonio, Maksimovic Nemanja, Drid Patrik, Bianco Antonino
Sport and Exercise Sciences Research Unit, Department of Psychology, Educational Science and Human Movement, University of Palermo, Via Giovanni Pascoli 6, 90144, Palermo, Italy.
Faculty of Sport and Physical Education, University of Novi Sad, 21000, Novi Sad, Serbia.
BMC Sports Sci Med Rehabil. 2022 Nov 30;14(1):202. doi: 10.1186/s13102-022-00599-8.
The aim of this study was to compare the positional transversal release (PTR) technique to stretching and evaluate the acute effects on range of movement (ROM), performance and balance.
Thirty-two healthy individuals (25.3 ± 5.6 years; 68.8 ± 12.5 kg; 172.0 ± 8.8 cm) were tested on four occasions 1 week apart. ROM through a passive straight leg raise, jumping performance through a standing long jump (SLJ) and balance through the Y-balance test were measured. Each measure was assessed before (T0), immediately after (T1) and after 15 min (T2) of the provided intervention. On the first occasion, no intervention was administered (CG). The intervention order was randomized across participants and comprised static stretching (SS), proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation (PNF) and the PTR technique. A repeated measure analysis of variance was used for comparisons.
No differences across the T0 of the four testing sessions were observed. No differences between T0, T1 and T2 were present for the CG session. A significant time × group interaction for ROM in both legs from T0 to T1 (mean increase of 5.4° and 4.9° for right and left leg, respectively) was observed for SS, PNF and the PTR. No differences for all groups were present between T1 and T2. No differences in the SLJ and in measures of balance were observed across interventions.
The PTR is equally effective as SS and PNF in acutely increasing ROM of the lower limbs. However, the PTR results less time-consuming than SS and PNF. Performance and balance were unaffected by all the proposed interventions.
本研究旨在比较位置横向松解(PTR)技术与拉伸,并评估其对活动范围(ROM)、运动表现和平衡的急性影响。
32名健康个体(年龄25.3±5.6岁;体重68.8±12.5千克;身高172.0±8.8厘米),每隔1周接受4次测试。测量通过被动直腿抬高的ROM、通过立定跳远(SLJ)的跳跃表现以及通过Y平衡测试的平衡能力。每项测量在提供干预前(T0)、干预后即刻(T1)和干预后15分钟(T2)进行评估。第一次测试时,不给予任何干预(CG)。干预顺序在参与者中随机分配,包括静态拉伸(SS)、本体感觉神经肌肉促进法(PNF)和PTR技术。采用重复测量方差分析进行比较。
四个测试阶段的T0之间未观察到差异。CG阶段的T0、T1和T2之间没有差异。对于SS、PNF和PTR,观察到从T0到T1双腿ROM存在显著的时间×组交互作用(右腿和左腿平均增加分别为5.4°和4.9°)。所有组在T1和T2之间没有差异。各干预措施在SLJ和平衡测量方面没有差异。
PTR在急性增加下肢ROM方面与SS和PNF同样有效。然而,PTR比SS和PNF耗时更少。所有提出的干预措施对运动表现和平衡均无影响。