背景:静态拉伸(SS)时,本体感受神经肌肉促进(PNF)和振荡生理动员技术被证明对运动范围(ROM)有积极影响,没有关于动态振荡拉伸(DOS)影响的报道,一种结合了这三种技术的技术,关于腿筋的可扩展性。
目的:确定在无症状的年轻参与者中,DOS是否比SS更大程度地改善了腿筋延伸性和拉伸耐受性。
方法:随机对照试验。
方法:60名参与者(47名女性,13名男性,平均年龄22±1岁,身高166±6厘米,体重67.6±9.7kg)完成了被动直腿(SLR),以建立参与者感知的腿筋延展性和拉伸耐受性,使用视觉模拟量表(VAS)。参与者被随机分配到两个治疗组(SS或DOS)之一或安慰剂对照(每组20个)。每次干预后立即和一小时后重复测试。使用双向重复测量方差分析(ANOVA)和Tukey的事后检验评估数据。
结果:立即干预后,SS和DOS组的SLR测量的腿筋可扩展性均有显着改善,DOS组比SS组显着增加(对照73±12°,SS86±8°,DOS94±11°,p<0.001)。干预后一小时,DOS组的腿筋可扩展性仍然很高,而SS组与对照组不再不同(对照73±12°,SS80±8°,DOS89±12°,p=0.001)。此外,SS组的拉伸耐受性仍然显着提高,但是对照组和DOS组之间没有差异,(控制4.6±1.3,SS5.9±0.8,DOS4.3±1.0AU,p<0.001)。
结论:DOS比SS更有效地实现了腿筋可扩展性的立即增加,和DOS表现出增加的拉伸耐量一小时后干预。
方法:2C。
BACKGROUND: While static stretch (SS), proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation (PNF) and oscillatory physiological mobilization techniques are documented to have positive effects on a range of motion (ROM), there are no reports on the effect of dynamic oscillatory stretching (DOS), a technique that combines these three techniques, on hamstring extensibility.
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether DOS improves hamstring extensibility and stretch tolerance to a greater degree than SS in asymptomatic young participants.
METHODS: Randomized Controlled Trial.
METHODS: Sixty participants (47 females, 13 males, mean age 22 ± 1 years, height 166 ± 6 centimeters, body mass 67.6 ± 9.7 kg) completed a passive straight leg (SLR) to establish hamstring extensibility and stretch tolerance as perceived by participants, using a visual analogue scale (VAS). Participants were randomly assigned to one of two treatment groups (SS or DOS) or a placebo control (20 per group). Tests were repeated immediately following and one hour after each intervention. Data were assessed using a two-way repeated measure analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey\'s post hoc test.
RESULTS: Immediately post-intervention, there was a significant improvement in the hamstring extensibility as measured by the SLR in both the SS and DOS groups, with the DOS group exhibiting a significantly greater increase than the SS group (Control 73 ± 12°, SS 86 ± 8°, DOS 94 ± 11°, p < 0.001). One hour post-intervention, hamstring extensibility in the DOS group remained elevated, while the SS group no longer differed from the control group (Control 73 ± 12°, SS 80 ± 8°, DOS 89 ± 12°, p = 0.001). Furthermore, the stretch tolerance remained significantly elevated for the SS group, but there was no difference between the control and DOS groups, (Control 4.6 ± 1.3, SS 5.9 ± 0.8, DOS 4.3 ± 1.0 AU, p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: DOS was more effective than SS at achieving an immediate increase in hamstring extensibility, and DOS demonstrated an increased stretch tolerance one-hour post-intervention.
METHODS: 2C.