METHODS: A randomized, blinded, crossover trial carried out in university research laboratory. Thirty healthy young adults were randomly allocated to three groups, each group receive unilateral, central posterior-anterior LM grade III to the L4 joint, hold-relax PNF and control intervention in a different order with 48 h of washout period. Hamstring flexibility was measured using photogrammetry before and immediately after intervention through range of motion (ROM) change in the Straight Leg Raise Test. T-tests were used to compare ROM within groups, and ANOVA repeated measure followed by Bonferroni post-hoc tests was used for between groups comparison.
RESULTS: Two participants were lost to follow-up, leaving 28 for analysis (21.6 ± 2.2 years-old). LM increased 4.5° (95% CI 2.3-6.5°, p = 0.001, d = 0.29) on the straight leg raise test and PNF increased 10.0° (95% CI 7.7-12.2°, p = 0.001, d = 0.7). No statistically significant increase was observed on the control group (p = 0.151, d = 0.08). Further, the technique used significantly influenced ROM (p = 0.001, η²p = 0.37). On the between group analysis, PNF was better than LM (p = 0.005) and control (p = 0.001), whereas LM was no better than the control for hamstring flexibility (p = 0.68).
CONCLUSIONS: Although hold-relax PNF and unilateral LM techniques increased ROM, hold-relax PNF was more effective on increasing hamstring flexibility.
方法:随机,失明,交叉试验在大学研究实验室进行。将30名健康青年随机分为三组,每个小组接受单方面的,L4关节的中央前后LMIII级,保持放松PNF和控制干预以不同的顺序进行48小时的冲洗期。通过直腿抬高测试中的运动范围(ROM)变化,在干预之前和之后立即使用摄影测量法测量腿筋的柔韧性。T检验用于比较组内的ROM,和方差分析重复测量后Bonferroni事后检验用于组间比较。
结果:两名参与者失访,剩下28个用于分析(21.6±2.2岁)。LM增加4.5°(95%CI2.3-6.5°,p=0.001,d=0.29)在直腿抬高试验中,PNF增加了10.0°(95%CI7.7-12.2°,p=0.001,d=0.7)。对照组没有观察到统计学上的显着增加(p=0.151,d=0.08)。Further,使用的技术显着影响ROM(p=0.001,η²p=0.37)。关于组间分析,PNF优于LM(p=0.005)和对照(p=0.001),而LM的腿筋柔韧性并不比对照组好(p=0.68)。
结论:尽管保持松弛PNF和单边LM技术增加了ROM,保持放松PNF对增加腿筋柔韧性更有效。