The Effect of 4 Different Durations of Static Hamstring Stretching on Passive Knee-Extension Range of Motion

2005 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 95-107 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gregory S. Ford ◽  
Margaret A. Mazzone ◽  
Keith Taylor
Keyword(s):  
Range Of Motion ◽  
Outcome Measure ◽  
Knee Extension ◽  
Static Stretching ◽  
College Age ◽  
Type Design

Design:Pretest–posttest.Objective:To determine the effect of 4 durations of static hamstring stretching on knee-extension passive range of motion (KE-PROM).Context:Effects of longer (90 and 120 seconds) static hamstring stretching on PROM have not been established relative to more typically recommended 30- or 60-second durations.Subjects:35 healthy college-age subjects with >20° loss of KE-PROM.Outcome Measure:KE-PROM.Intervention:5-week program of single daily stretch for 30, 60, 90, or 120 seconds.Results:Static stretching was effective in increasing KE-PROM regardless of stretch duration (P< .0001). A significant improvement was identified in mean PROM for each stretching group, but no difference existed among the 4 stretch-duration groups. The control group’s mean PROM decreased (mean = -3.2°, SD = 1.9), whereas each stretching group increased PROM (means 1.9° to 3.6°).Conclusions:Five weeks of daily static hamstring stretching for 30, 60, 90, or 120 seconds increase KE-PROM. Similar benefits were achieved regardless of stretch duration, suggesting that clinicians need not perform static hamstring stretches of more than 30 seconds.

Duration of Maintained Hamstring ROM Following Termination of Three Stretching Protocols

2007 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 18-27 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philip Ford ◽  
John McChesney
Keyword(s):  
Range Of Motion ◽  
Active Control ◽  
Combined Treatment ◽  
Knee Extension ◽  
Specific Method ◽  
Static Stretch ◽  
Control Techniques ◽  
College Age ◽  
Type Design ◽  
Single Bout

Context:Literature supports habitual stretching for increasing an individual’s flexibility; however, immediate gains in range of motion have received limited investigation.Objective:The purpose of this study was to determine the retention of active knee extension range of motion (AKE ROM) after a single bout of stretching.Design:Subjects participated in three experimental stretching groups: contract-relax, agonist contract (CRAC); static stretch; and active control stretch. AKE ROM was measured by an analog inclinometer fixed to a modified Orthotron II for pretreatment and posttreatment measurements at 0, 3, 7, 12, 18, and 25 minutes.Participants:32 active male and female college age students.Results:Analysis suggested that stretching as a combined treatment effect demonstrated an increase in AKE ROM that lasted for 25 minutes; however, no specific method of stretching was found to be more beneficial.Conclusion:Stretching utilizing CRAC, static, or active control techniques lend support to their use for the purpose of increasing and retaining ROM prior to physical activity.

scholarly journals Time course of changes in the range of motion and muscle-tendon unit stiffness of the hamstrings after two different intensities of static stretching

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (9) ◽  
pp. e0257367
Author(s):  
Kosuke Takeuchi ◽  
Kazunori Akizuki ◽  
Masatoshi Nakamura
Keyword(s):  
Range Of Motion ◽  
Time Course ◽  
Random Order ◽  
Knee Extension ◽  
Static Stretching ◽  
Healthy Men ◽  
Passive Torque ◽  
Stretching Intensity

Objectives The purpose of this study was to examine the time course of changes in the range of motion and muscle-tendon unit stiffness of the hamstrings after two different intensities of static stretching. Methods Fourteen healthy men (20.9 ± 0.7 years, 169.1 ± 7.5cm, 61.6 ± 6.5kg) received static stretching for 60 seconds at two different intensities based on the point of discomfort (100%POD and 120%POD) of each participant, in random order. To evaluate the time course of changes in the flexibility of the hamstrings, the knee extension range of motion (ROM), passive torque at end ROM, and muscle-tendon unit stiffness were measured pre-stretching, post-stretching, and at both 10 and 20 minutes after static stretching. Results For both intensities, ROM and passive torque at pre-stretching were significantly smaller than those at post-stretching (p < 0.01 in both intensities), 10 minutes (p < 0.01 in both intensities), and 20 minutes (p < 0.01 in both intensities). The muscle-tendon unit stiffness at pre-stretching was significantly higher than that at post-stretching (p < 0.01), 10 minutes (p < 0.01), and 20 minutes (p < 0.01) only in the 120%POD, but it showed no change in the 100%POD. Conclusion The results showed that ROM and passive torque increased in both intensities, and the effects continued for at least 20 minutes after stretching regardless of stretching intensity. However, the muscle-tendon unit stiffness of the hamstrings decreased only after static stretching at the intensity of 120%POD, and the effects continued for at least 20 minutes after stretching.

scholarly journals Association between static stretching load and changes in the flexibility of the hamstrings

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kosuke Takeuchi ◽  
Kazunori Akizuki ◽  
Masatoshi Nakamura
Keyword(s):  
Range Of Motion ◽  
High Intensity ◽  
Random Order ◽  
Knee Extension ◽  
Static Stretching ◽  
Healthy Men ◽  
Passive Torque ◽  
Before And After

AbstractThe purpose of the present study was to examine the association between static stretching load and changes in the flexibility of the hamstrings. Twelve healthy men received static stretching for 60 s at two different intensities based on the point of discomfort (100%POD and 120%POD intensity), in random order. To assess the flexibility of the hamstrings, the knee extension range of motion (ROM). Passive torque at end ROM, and muscle–tendon unit stiffness were measured before and after stretching. The static stretching load was calculated from the passive torque throughout static stretching. The knee extension ROM and passive torque at end ROM increased in both intensities (p < 0.01). The muscle–tendon unit stiffness decreased only in the 120%POD (p < 0.01). There were significant correlations between the static stretching load and the relative changes in the knee extension ROM (r = 0.56, p < 0.01) and muscle–tendon unit stiffness (r = − 0.76, p < 0.01). The results suggested that the static stretching load had significant effects on changes in the knee extension ROM and muscle–tendon unit stiffness of the hamstrings, and high-intensity static stretching was useful for improving the flexibility of the hamstrings because of its high static stretching load.

scholarly journals Effect of Active Dynamic Versus Passive Static Stretching on Hamstring Muscle Tightness in Healthy Female Students: A Randomized Trial Study

2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 134-138
Author(s):  
Mojtaba Heshmatipour ◽  
Azam Esfandiari ◽  
Maryam Kazemi Naeini ◽  
Mehdi Raei ◽  
Omolbanin Firoozpur ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Range Of Motion ◽  
Repeated Measures ◽  
Muscle Length ◽  
Knee Extension ◽  
Female Students ◽  
Static Stretching ◽  
Hamstring Muscle ◽  
Dynamic Stretching ◽  
Muscle Tightness ◽  
Healthy Female

Background: For decades, static stretching has been the standard benchmark for training programs, because it has been shown to increase flexibility compared with other methods of stretching. Objective: The current study investigated and compared the effects of active dynamic stretching and passive static stretching on hamstring tightness. Methods: For this experiment, 64 female students were enrolled and randomly assigned to active dynamic or passive static stretching groups (n=32 each). The first and second experimental groups were trained with repetitive dynamic stretching and static stretching exercises, respectively. Exercises were performed 10 times per limb, 3 times per day, 5 days per week for 4 weeks. Hamstring muscle length measurements were repeated in weeks 2 and 4. Statistical analysis of the results was performed by t-test and repeated measures ANOVA using SPSS 15. Results: Both experimental groups showed significant improvements in the active knee extension range of motion during the intervention (P<0.001). However, active stretching showed better results and had a greater effect on range of motion in comparison with static stretching. Conclusion: Active dynamic training can be considered a suitable method for increasing the flexibility of the hamstring muscle and, consequently, reducing the complications and problems associated with hamstring tightness.

scholarly journals The Effectiveness of PNF Versus Static Stretching on Increasing Hip-Flexion Range of Motion

2018 ◽  
Vol 27 (3) ◽  
pp. 289-294 ◽  
Author(s):  
Landon Lempke ◽  
Rebecca Wilkinson ◽  
Caitlin Murray ◽  
Justin Stanek
Keyword(s):  
Range Of Motion ◽  
Knee Extension ◽  
Static Stretching ◽  
Bottom Line ◽  
Physically Active ◽  
Active Population ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Methods And Techniques ◽  
Hip Flexion ◽  
Joint Range

Clinical Scenario:Stretching is applied for the purposes of injury prevention, increasing joint range of motion (ROM), and increasing muscle extensibility. Many researchers have investigated various methods and techniques to determine the most effective way to increase joint ROM and muscle extensibility. Despite the numerous studies conducted, controversy still remains within clinical practice and the literature regarding the best methods and techniques for stretching.Focused Clinical Question:Is proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation (PNF) stretching more effective than static stretching for increasing hamstring muscle extensibility through increased hip ROM or increased knee extension angle (KEA) in a physically active population?Summary of Key Findings:Five studies met the inclusion criteria and were included. All 5 studies were randomized control trials examining mobility of the hamstring group. The studies measured hamstring ROM in a variety of ways. Three studies measured active KEA, 1 study measured passive KEA, and 1 study measured hip ROM via the single-leg raise test. Of the 5 studies, 1 study found greater improvements using PNF over static stretching for increasing hip flexion, and the remaining 4 studies found no significant difference between PNF stretching and static stretching in increasing muscle extensibility, active KEA, or hip ROM.Clinical Bottom Line:PNF stretching was not demonstrated to be more effective at increasing hamstring extensibility compared to static stretching. The literature reviewed suggests both are effective methods for increasing hip-flexion ROM.Strength of Recommendation:Using level 2 evidence and higher, the results show both static and PNF stretching effectively increase ROM; however, one does not appear to be more effective than the other.

Effect of Foam Rolling and Static Stretching on Passive Hip-Flexion Range of Motion

2014 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. 296-299 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew R. Mohr ◽  
Blaine C. Long ◽  
Carla L. Goad
Keyword(s):  
Range Of Motion ◽  
Outcome Measure ◽  
Lower Extremity Injury ◽  
Static Stretching ◽  
Static Stretch ◽  
Main Outcome Measure ◽  
Foam Rolling ◽  
Significant Change ◽  
Hip Flexion ◽  
And Control

Context:Many athletes report that foam rollers help release tension in their muscles, thus resulting in greater range of motion (ROM) when used before stretching. To date, no investigators have examined foam rollers and static stretching.Objective:To determine if foam rolling before static stretching produces a significant change in passive hip-flexion ROM.Design:Controlled laboratory study.Setting:Research laboratory.Participants:40 subjects with less than 90° of passive hip-flexion ROM and no lower-extremity injury in the 6 mo before data collection.Interventions:During each of 6 sessions, subjects' passive hip-flexion ROM was measured before and immediately after static stretching, foam rolling and static stretching, foam rolling, or nothing (control). To minimize accessory movement of the hip and contralateral leg, subjects lay supine with a strap placed across their hip and another strap located over the uninvolved leg just superior to the patella. A bubble inclinometer was then aligned on the thigh of the involved leg, with which subjects then performed hip flexion.Main Outcome Measure:Change in passive hip-flexion ROM from the preintervention measure on day 1 to the postintervention measure on day 6.Results:There was a significant change in passive hip-flexion ROM regardless of treatment (F3,17 = 8.06, P = .001). Subjects receiving foam roll and static stretch had a greater change in passive hip-flexion ROM compared with the static-stretch (P = .04), foam-rolling (P = .006), and control (P = .001) groups.Conclusions:Our results support the use of a foam roller in combination with a static-stretching protocol. If time allows and maximal gains in hip-flexion ROM are desired, foam rolling the hamstrings muscle group before static stretching would be appropriate in noninjured subjects who have less than 90° of hamstring ROM.

scholarly journals Effects of Different Stretching Times on Range of Motion in Patients with Hamstring Tightness: A Randomised Control Trial

2018 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. 554-559
Author(s):  
Halima Shoukat ◽  
Hafiz Sheraz Arshad ◽  
Faiza Sharif ◽  
Arooj Fatima ◽  
Filza Shoukat
Keyword(s):  
Knee Joint ◽  
Range Of Motion ◽  
Knee Extension ◽  
Repeated Measure ◽  
Randomised Control Trial ◽  
Static Stretching ◽  
Static Stretch ◽  
Mean Values ◽  
Measure Analysis ◽  
Hamstring Flexibility

Hamstring tightness is commonest cause of altered biomechanics of ankle, knee, hip and spine. Long persistent tightness results in pain, decreased range of motion and others pathologies in knee joint. Stretching techniques are used to treat muscle tightness. In clinical settings, different stretch holding timesare used to treat hamstring tightness. The purpose of the study was to determine effects of different static stretch holding-times on hamstring muscles flexibility and their impacts on improving range of motion (ROM) of knee extension in adults. This experimental work was conducted on students of University of Lahorefrom December 2013 to March 2014. The study comprised of 60 subjects with asymptomatic tightness of hamstrings muscles and subjects were aged between 18-26 years (irrespective of their gender). Range of motion at knee joint was measured by universal goniometer before the commencement of stretching technique. Static stretching was applied to group A, B and C with 30, 60 and 90 seconds holds, respectively. Stretches were exerted at frequency of three sessions per week and three repetitions per session. Reevaluation of ROM was performed after 4 and 6 weeks. The mean values of ROM of knee extension showed gainin range after applying static stretching at 30s, 60s and 90s holding times. By applying repeated measure analysis of variance (ANOVA), the p-values were found to be statistically significant (p<0.001) for static stretching techniques with 30s, 60s, 90s holding times, respectively. Based on these finding, it is plausible toconclude that application of static stretching at holding times of 30, 60 and 90 seconds can significantly improve the ROM of knee extension. Stretching techniques with different holding times were equally effective in improving knee extension and gaining hamstring flexibility in adults.

scholarly journals A Comparison of Static Stretching Versus Combined Static and Ballistic Stretching in Active Knee Range of Motion

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nathan Blackhurst ◽  
James Peterson ◽  
Valerie Herzog ◽  
Ericka Zimmerman
Keyword(s):  
Range Of Motion ◽  
Knee Extension ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Static Stretching ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Post Test ◽  
Homogeneity Of Variance ◽  
History Of ◽  
P 351 ◽  
Post Hoc

Background: There is continued controversy related to flexibility gains from different stretching protocols and within single protocols. Stretching methods include static, ballistic, dynamic, and proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation (PNF). A combination of stretching methods may be an improved way to increase active knee range of motion (ROM). This study evaluated a single program formulated with static and ballistic components. Objective: To compare active knee ROM following stretching programs which either included combined static and ballistic stretching (CSBS) or static stretching (SS) alone. It was hypothesized that CSBS would show a greater increase in active knee ROM than SS. Setting: The pre- and post- measurements were performed in a laboratory. Subjects were randomly assigned to either treatment group or a non-stretching control group and given written instructions on how to perform their designated protocol at home. Subjects: Forty-three (33M, 10F) healthy collegiate aged participants (24.0 + 3.69 yrs, 176.21 + 10.0 cm, 78.15 + 12.93 kg) with no history of injury to the lower extremity or low back for the previous 6 months were eligible to participate in the study. Interventions: Two treatment groups either performed SS or CSBS for 30 seconds on each leg, twice a day for 2 weeks. All subjects but 3 provided both legs, and each leg was evaluated separately, providing 83 total measurements. Main Outcome Measures: A Johnson Digital Inclinometer was used to measure active knee extension. A mixed ANOVA with a Tukey post hoc test was used for statistical analysis. Results: There was no statistically significant difference in active knee ROM between groups at the pre-test, F(2,80)=1.062, p=.351, partial ƞ2=.026 (SS: 52.56 + 7.50º, CSBS: 49.84 + 8.91⁰, control: 49.39 + 10.09⁰). There was a statistically significant difference in active knee ROM between groups at the post-test, F(2,80)=29.034, p .05). There was homogeneity of covariance’s, as assessed by Box's test of equality of covariance matrices (p = .076). There was homogeneity of variances, as assessed by Levene's test of homogeneity of variance (p>.05). Conclusions: SS and CSBS are equally effective for improving active knee ROM. A trend indicating CSBS showing only slightly greater differences may be due to limited time allowed to master the CSBS method, with no supervision during stretching sessions.

Immediate effects of static and proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation stretching of hamstring muscles on straight leg raise, craniovertebral angle, and cervical spine range of motion in neck pain patients with hamstring tightness: A prospective randomized controlled trial

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-10
Author(s):  
Eun-Dong Jeong ◽  
Chang-Yong Kim ◽  
Nack-Hwan Kim ◽  
Hyeong-Dong Kim
Keyword(s):  
Cervical Spine ◽  
Neck Pain ◽  
Range Of Motion ◽  
T Test ◽  
Static Stretching ◽  
Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Straight Leg Raise ◽  
Pain Patients ◽  
Group Effects

BACKGROUND: The cranio-cervical flexion exercise and sub-occipital muscle inhibition technique have been used to improve a forward head posture among neck pain patients with straight leg raise (SLR) limitation. However, little is known about the cranio-vertebral angle (CVA) and cervical spine range of motion (CROM) after applying stretching methods to the hamstring muscle. OBJECTIVE: To compare the immediate effects of static stretching and proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation stretching on SLR, CVA, and CROM in neck pain patients with hamstring tightness. METHODS: 64 subjects were randomly allocated to the static stretching (n1= 32) or proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation (n2= 32) stretching group. The SLR test was performed to measure the hamstring muscle’s flexibility and tightness between the two groups, with CROM and CVA also being measured. The paired t-test was used to compare all the variables within each group before and after the intervention. The independent t-test was used to compare the two groups before and after the stretching exercise. RESULTS: There were no between-group effects for any outcome variables (P> 0.05). However, all SLR, CVA, and CROM outcome variables were significantly improved within-group (P< 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: There were no between-group effects for any outcome variable; however, SLR, CVA, and CROM significantly improved within-group after the one-session intervention in neck pain patients with hamstring tightness.

Does soft tissue mobilization assist static stretching to improve hamstring flexibility? A randomized controlled trial

2020 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Shibili Nuhmani
Keyword(s):  
Soft Tissue ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Knee Extension ◽  
Repeated Measure ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Static Stretching ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Hamstring Flexibility ◽  
Soft Tissue Mobilization ◽  
Experimental Group

AbstractObjectivesObjective of the study is to investigate whether Soft tissue mobilization (STM) can assist with static stretching to improve hamstring flexibly.MethodsThe design of the study was repeated measure design. The study was conducted at the physical therapy laboratory of Jamia Hamdard University, New Delhi. Participants included 78 healthy males with hamstring tightness, randomly assigned to either the control group (static stretching) or the experimental group (STM and static stretching). The experimental group received five sets of four different STM techniques, followed by two sets of 30-s static stretches 3 days per week over the course of 12 weeks. The control group received 5 min of sham ultrasound with an inactive probe prior to static stretching. Active knee extension test (AKE) was the outcome measure.ResultsBoth groups showed significant improvement in AKE compared with the baseline measurements. With ingroup analysis showed a significant difference in AKE across all measured time periods (weeks 4, 8, and 12) with pre-test in both groups (p<0.05). No significant difference in AKE improvement was found between groups (p>0.05).ConclusionThe results of this study show that STM prior to static stretching does not significantly improve hamstring flexibility among healthy individuals. Although this study cannot be generalized, the results may be useful for evidence-based practice in the management of hamstring tightness.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document