Export Ready — 

Assessment and comparison of the effects of two techniques on hamstring flexibility

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Navega, Marcelo Tavella [UNESP]
Publication Date: 2014
Other Authors: Paleari, Bruna, Morcelli, Mary Hellen
Format: Article
Language: eng
Source: Repositório Institucional da UNESP
Download full: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/0103-5150.027.004.AO10
http://hdl.handle.net/11449/114457
Summary: Introduction There are several stretching techniques that help increase flexibility, however, there are still questions regarding which method leads to the most effective gains. Objectives To assess and compare the effects of two stretching techniques, namely proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation (PNF) and static stretching on the flexibility of hamstring muscles of young women. Methods The study sample consisted of 45 young women, mean age 20.45 (± 1.66),assigned to one of three groups: static stretching group (SSG, n = 15), proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation group (PNFG, n = 15) and control group (CG, n = 15). Both SSG and PNFG carried out three weekly stretching sessions over a four-week period. The sit and reach and popliteal angle tests were used at the beginning and end of the intervention. Normally distributed data were analyzed using Student’s t-test, whereas data with non-normal distribution were analyzed using the Wilcoxon test, to compare initial and end measurements for each technique. Finally, we used the Mann-Whitney U test to compare both techniques with each other. A significance level of 5% (p < 0.05) was adopted. Results There was a significant increase in hamstring flexibility when analyzing the assessments and reassessments of both stretching protocols. Conclusions Both techniques were effective in increasing hamstring flexibility and there were no significant differences to indicate which one is better in increasing the flexibility of this muscle group.
id UNSP_056bc00a8c715182e74eef431fa4451c
oai_identifier_str oai:repositorio.unesp.br:11449/114457
network_acronym_str UNSP
network_name_str Repositório Institucional da UNESP
repository_id_str 2946
spelling Assessment and comparison of the effects of two techniques on hamstring flexibilityAvaliação e comparação dos efeitos de duas técnicas de alongamento na flexibilidade dos músculos isquiotibiaisAlongamentoIsquiotibiaisFlexibilidadeMulheresFisioterapiaStretchingHamstringsFlexibilityWomenPhysical TherapyIntroduction There are several stretching techniques that help increase flexibility, however, there are still questions regarding which method leads to the most effective gains. Objectives To assess and compare the effects of two stretching techniques, namely proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation (PNF) and static stretching on the flexibility of hamstring muscles of young women. Methods The study sample consisted of 45 young women, mean age 20.45 (± 1.66),assigned to one of three groups: static stretching group (SSG, n = 15), proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation group (PNFG, n = 15) and control group (CG, n = 15). Both SSG and PNFG carried out three weekly stretching sessions over a four-week period. The sit and reach and popliteal angle tests were used at the beginning and end of the intervention. Normally distributed data were analyzed using Student’s t-test, whereas data with non-normal distribution were analyzed using the Wilcoxon test, to compare initial and end measurements for each technique. Finally, we used the Mann-Whitney U test to compare both techniques with each other. A significance level of 5% (p < 0.05) was adopted. Results There was a significant increase in hamstring flexibility when analyzing the assessments and reassessments of both stretching protocols. Conclusions Both techniques were effective in increasing hamstring flexibility and there were no significant differences to indicate which one is better in increasing the flexibility of this muscle group.Introdução Existem diversas técnicas de alongamento que auxiliam o aumento de flexibilidade, entretanto ainda prevalecem dúvidas sobre qual método aponte ganhos majoritariamente eficazes. Objetivos Avaliar e comparar os efeitos das técnicas de alongamento Facilitação Neuromuscular Proprioceptiva (FNP) e o Alongamento Estático na flexibilidade dos músculos isquiotibiais de jovens mulheres. Métodos Participaram do estudo 45 jovens, mulheres, com média de idade entre 20,45 (± 1,66), que foram divididas em três grupos: grupo alongamento estático (GAE, n = 15), grupo alongamento facilitação neuromuscular proprioceptiva (GFNP, n = 15) e grupo controle (GC, n = 15). Os grupos GAE e GNFP realizaram três sessões semanais de alongamento durante quatro semanas. As voluntárias foram avaliadas por meio do Teste Sentar e alcançar e pelo Teste do Ângulo poplíteo no início e ao fim das intervenções. Os dados com distribuição normal foram analisados pelo Teste t de student, para os dados com distribuição não normal, foi utilizado o Teste de Wilcoxon para comparar cada técnica e o Teste de Mann-whitney para comprar as duas técnicas. Foi adotado o nível de significância de 5% (p < 0,05). Resultados Houve aumento significativo da flexibilidade dos músculos isquiotibiais quando analisadas as avaliações e reavaliações em ambos os protocolos de alongamento. Conclusões Ambas as técnicas são eficazes para o ganho de flexibilidade dos músculos isquiotibiais, não apresentando diferenças significativas que evidenciasse qual delas é a melhor para o ganho de flexibilidade desse grupo muscular.Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq)Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES)Universidade Estadual Paulista Júlio de Mesquita Filho Departamento de Fisioterapia e Terapia OcupacionalUniversidade Estadual PaulistaUniversidade Estadual Paulista Júlio de Mesquita Filho Departamento de Fisioterapia e Terapia OcupacionalUniversidade Estadual PaulistaPontifícia Universidade Católica do ParanáUniversidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)Navega, Marcelo Tavella [UNESP]Paleari, BrunaMorcelli, Mary Hellen2015-02-02T12:39:33Z2015-02-02T12:39:33Z2014-12-01info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/article583-589application/pdfhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1590/0103-5150.027.004.AO10Fisioterapia em Movimento. Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Paraná, v. 27, n. 4, p. 583-589, 2014.0103-5150http://hdl.handle.net/11449/11445710.1590/0103-5150.027.004.AO10S0103-51502014000400583S0103-51502014000400583.pdf1153464448003029SciELOreponame:Repositório Institucional da UNESPinstname:Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)instacron:UNESPengFisioterapia em Movimentoinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess2024-08-09T15:17:09Zoai:repositorio.unesp.br:11449/114457Repositório InstitucionalPUBhttp://repositorio.unesp.br/oai/requestrepositoriounesp@unesp.bropendoar:29462024-08-09T15:17:09Repositório Institucional da UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Assessment and comparison of the effects of two techniques on hamstring flexibility
Avaliação e comparação dos efeitos de duas técnicas de alongamento na flexibilidade dos músculos isquiotibiais
title Assessment and comparison of the effects of two techniques on hamstring flexibility
spellingShingle Assessment and comparison of the effects of two techniques on hamstring flexibility
Navega, Marcelo Tavella [UNESP]
Alongamento
Isquiotibiais
Flexibilidade
Mulheres
Fisioterapia
Stretching
Hamstrings
Flexibility
Women
Physical Therapy
title_short Assessment and comparison of the effects of two techniques on hamstring flexibility
title_full Assessment and comparison of the effects of two techniques on hamstring flexibility
title_fullStr Assessment and comparison of the effects of two techniques on hamstring flexibility
title_full_unstemmed Assessment and comparison of the effects of two techniques on hamstring flexibility
title_sort Assessment and comparison of the effects of two techniques on hamstring flexibility
author Navega, Marcelo Tavella [UNESP]
author_facet Navega, Marcelo Tavella [UNESP]
Paleari, Bruna
Morcelli, Mary Hellen
author_role author
author2 Paleari, Bruna
Morcelli, Mary Hellen
author2_role author
author
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Navega, Marcelo Tavella [UNESP]
Paleari, Bruna
Morcelli, Mary Hellen
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Alongamento
Isquiotibiais
Flexibilidade
Mulheres
Fisioterapia
Stretching
Hamstrings
Flexibility
Women
Physical Therapy
topic Alongamento
Isquiotibiais
Flexibilidade
Mulheres
Fisioterapia
Stretching
Hamstrings
Flexibility
Women
Physical Therapy
description Introduction There are several stretching techniques that help increase flexibility, however, there are still questions regarding which method leads to the most effective gains. Objectives To assess and compare the effects of two stretching techniques, namely proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation (PNF) and static stretching on the flexibility of hamstring muscles of young women. Methods The study sample consisted of 45 young women, mean age 20.45 (± 1.66),assigned to one of three groups: static stretching group (SSG, n = 15), proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation group (PNFG, n = 15) and control group (CG, n = 15). Both SSG and PNFG carried out three weekly stretching sessions over a four-week period. The sit and reach and popliteal angle tests were used at the beginning and end of the intervention. Normally distributed data were analyzed using Student’s t-test, whereas data with non-normal distribution were analyzed using the Wilcoxon test, to compare initial and end measurements for each technique. Finally, we used the Mann-Whitney U test to compare both techniques with each other. A significance level of 5% (p < 0.05) was adopted. Results There was a significant increase in hamstring flexibility when analyzing the assessments and reassessments of both stretching protocols. Conclusions Both techniques were effective in increasing hamstring flexibility and there were no significant differences to indicate which one is better in increasing the flexibility of this muscle group.
publishDate 2014
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2014-12-01
2015-02-02T12:39:33Z
2015-02-02T12:39:33Z
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/0103-5150.027.004.AO10
Fisioterapia em Movimento. Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Paraná, v. 27, n. 4, p. 583-589, 2014.
0103-5150
http://hdl.handle.net/11449/114457
10.1590/0103-5150.027.004.AO10
S0103-51502014000400583
S0103-51502014000400583.pdf
1153464448003029
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/0103-5150.027.004.AO10
http://hdl.handle.net/11449/114457
identifier_str_mv Fisioterapia em Movimento. Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Paraná, v. 27, n. 4, p. 583-589, 2014.
0103-5150
10.1590/0103-5150.027.004.AO10
S0103-51502014000400583
S0103-51502014000400583.pdf
1153464448003029
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv Fisioterapia em Movimento
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv 583-589
application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Paraná
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Paraná
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv SciELO
reponame:Repositório Institucional da UNESP
instname:Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)
instacron:UNESP
instname_str Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)
instacron_str UNESP
institution UNESP
reponame_str Repositório Institucional da UNESP
collection Repositório Institucional da UNESP
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositório Institucional da UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv repositoriounesp@unesp.br
_version_ 1834484128408403968