Comparison of effectiveness and durability of two stretching methods (Hold-Relax, Static Stretching) for treatment of hamstring muscle tightness

AUTHORS

S Sadat Naimi 1 , * , SM Firooz Abadi 2 , Giti Torkaman 1 , A Moradi 1 , S Haghighivand 1 , Y Khoshamooz 1 , Alireza Sarmadi 1

1 Physiotherapy Dept, Medical Faculty, Tarbiat Modarress Univercity, Tehran, Iran.

2 Medical engineering, Medical Faculty, Tarbiat Modarress Univercity, Tehran, Iran.

How to Cite: Sadat Naimi S, Firooz Abadi S, Torkaman G, Moradi A, Haghighivand S, et al. Comparison of effectiveness and durability of two stretching methods (Hold-Relax, Static Stretching) for treatment of hamstring muscle tightness, Zahedan J Res Med Sci. 2006 ; 8(4):e94879.

ARTICLE INFORMATION

Zahedan Journal of Research in Medical Sciences: 8 (4); e94879
Published Online: June 23, 2006
Article Type: Research Article
Received: June 27, 2005
Accepted: February 05, 2006
READ FULL TEXT

Abstract

Background: It is quite obvious that stretching techniques enhance the joint range of motion.
However the permanency of these techniques after the treatment period remains questionable. So
this randomized clinical trial was done to determine and compare the permanency of Hold–Relax
and static Stretching techniques on extensibility of short hamstring during 4 weeks.
Methods and Materials: Twenty non-athlete girls with 18-26 years old with bilateral hamstring
muscles shortness (SLR≤ 650 ) were selected from Shahid Beheshti rehabilitation faculty in the year
1382. They were randomly assigned to two groups of 10 subjects. The first group received Hold–
Relax stretching while the second one received static stretch treatment for 4 weeks. Treatment
sessions were 3 times a week. Active and passive SLR, active and passive knee extension, pelvic tilt
and lumbar lordosis were measured before and after the 4 weeks of treatment, and then for
determination of permanency, the measurements were repeated every week for 4 weeks.
Results: Both groups showed a significant increase in all variables after 4 weeks of treatment.
The gained results significantly maintained up to the end of fourth week. In comparison of
treatment results and permanency, no significant differences were observed between the two
groups. (P >0.05)
Conclusion: These findings revealed that there is no clear difference in terms of effects and
permanency between the two techniques, so the results of our study enable clinicians to provide the
more simple technique in their stretching activities that is “static stretch”.

Fulltext

The full text of this article is available on the PDF file.

References

  • 1.

    The References of this article are available on the PDF file.

  • © 2006, Zahedan Journal of Research in Medical Sciences. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits copy and redistribute the material just in noncommercial usages, provided the original work is properly cited.
    COMMENTS

    LEAVE A COMMENT HERE: