Background: Despite its high prevalence, interventions in plantar fasciitis remain inconclusive. To improve the daily life of plantar fasciitis patients, it is necessary to identify appropriate interventions to improve pain and foot pressure and balance. Improving the interventions for plantar fasciitis is one of the main goals for rehabilitation. Objectives: To investigate the changes in pain and static-dynamic foot pressure and balance through the evaluation of 42 plantar fasciitis patient before and after the foot stretching and joint mobilization interventions. Design: Randomized controlled trial. Methods: The 42 subjects of the study were divided into a stretching group and a joint mobilization group with 21 subjects being assigned to each group. The results before and after the experiment were analyzed by applying stretching and joint movement interventions for a total of 6 weeks. Results: Before and after the intervention, there were significant improvements in the pain index and static-dynamic foot pressure and static balance in both stretching and joint mobilization groups. However, the between-group comparison indicated no significant differences. Conclusion: The stretching and the joint mobilization can improve the pain and static-dynamic foot pressure and static balance in plantar fasciitis patients.

Background: Although rectus femoris (RF) eccentric training and static stretching (SS) have been reported effectively on lumbar flexibility, and muscle architecture, most studies are results using machines and long-term effects. Therefore, we want to investigate the effect of Reverse Nordic Hamstring Exercise (RNHE), a self-eccentric training, by immediately comparing it with SS. Objectives: To compare the RNHE and SS of RF to show the effects of lumbar flexibility, and fascicle length (FL). Design: Randomized controlled trial. Methods: A total of 30 study subjects were randomly allocated into an experimental group(Reverse Nordic Hamstring Exercise) and a control group(Static Stretching). Before and after the intervention, the subject performed fingertip to floor test (FFT) to evaluate the flexibility of the lumbar spine and measured FL through the SONON 300L (Healcerion Inc., Seoul, South Korea). Results: There was a significant effect on lumbar flexibility within both groups (P<.05), also there were clear results between the two groups (P<.05). FL showed a significant increase in RNHE (P<.05), but not in SS, and there was a no significant difference between the two groups. Conclusion: RNHE is effective in improving lumbar flexibility, and FL of RF muscle.

Background: Although it has been reported that both self-myofascial release (SMR) with foam rolling (FR) and active static hamstring stretching (e.g., jackknife stretching) are effective in improving hamstring flexibility, no study has compared the effects of these exercises. Objectives: To compare the effects of SMR with FR and jack-knife stretching on hamstring flexibility. Design: A Randomized controlled trial. Methods: Subjects with hamstring tightness were divided into the SMR with the FR group (n=12) and the jack-knife stretching group (n=12). Subjects groups performed SMR with FR or jack-knife stretching according to group assignment. To identify changes in hamstring flexibility, the finger-to-floor distance (FFD) test, active knee extension (AKE) test, and passive straight leg raising (PSLR) test were performed at pre- and post-exercise. Results: Significant increases occurred in knee extension angle during the AKE test and hip flexion angle during the PSLR test after exercise in both groups (P<.001). Additionally, FFD and anterior pelvic tilt during the FFD test significantly increased (P<.001); however, we observed no significant interaction and main effects for the groups (P>.05). Conclusion: Both SMR with FR and jack-knife stretching are effective in improving hamstring flexibility in subjects with hamstring tightness.

Background: Static hamstring stretching exercises have been widely used to improve flexibility of the hamstring muscles. However, few studies have examined the influence of standing static hamstring stretching (e.g., jack-knife stretching) on movements of the lumbopelvic–hip complex. Objectives: To examine the short-term effects of jack-knife stretching on movements of the lumbopelvic–hip complex. Design: Case series. Methods: Fourteen participants with hamstring tightness (8 male, 6 female) were recruited. Participants performed jack-knife stretching for 150 s. Before and after stretching, participants performed the finger-to-floor distance (FFD), sit and reach (SRT), active knee extension (AKE), passive straight leg raising (PSLA), and active straight leg raising (ASLR) tests as well as pelvic tilt while standing to identify the effects of stretching. Results: There were significant improvements in the FFD, SRT, AKE, PSLA, and ASLR tests after stretching. However, pelvic tilt angle while standing did not significantly change. Conclusion: Jack-knife stretching can be a useful exercise to improve flexibility of the hamstring muscles, but not pelvic alignment while standing.

Background: To prevent or reduce the risk of strain injury, various approaches, including stretching techniques are currently being used. The effect of proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation (PNF) and static stretching on flexibility has been demonstrated; however, it is not clear which one is superior. Objects: This study aimed to evaluate the differences between the effects of PNF and static stretching performed at various intensities on muscle flexibility. Methods: The maximum voluntary isometric contraction (MVIC) of the hamstrings using the PNF stretching technique was performed in the P100 group, while 70% of the MVIC was performed in the P70 group. The MVIC value obtained during the PNF stretching in both groups was used as a reference for setting the intensity of static stretching. Static stretching was performed at 130% (S130), 100% (S100), and 70% of the MVIC (S70). The active knee extension (AKE) values, defined as the knee flexion angle were measured before stretching (baseline), immediately after stretching (post), and at 3 minutes, 6 minutes, and 15 minutes. Results: PNF stretching produce a greater improvement in flexibility compared with static stretching. Specifically, the ΔAKE was significantly higher in the S100 and S70 groups than in the P100 group at Post. In the comparison of ΔAKE over time in each group, the ΔAKE at Post showed a significant decrease compared to the value at Baseline in the S130 group; however, no significant difference was observed at 6 minutes while a significant increase was noted at 15 minutes. Conclusion: This study found that PNF stretching is more effective than static stretching with respect to increasing and maintaining the flexibility of muscles. In addition, the increase in flexibility at maximal intensity was similar to that observed at submaximal intensity during both PNF and static stretching.

Background: Lumbar lordosis is a result of muscle shortening and may cause low back pain. Objective: To examine the effects of static and dynamic stretching on lumbar lordosis and low back pain in university students. Stretching is an intervention that can be applied to shortened muscles; however, very few studies have compared the effects of static and dynamic stretching on lumbar lordosis and low back pain. Design: Randomized controlled clinical trial (single-blind) Methods: The 12 selected subjects were randomly assigned static stretching and dynamic stretching groups each containing six students. The subjects in each group performed their respective stretching programs for 17 minutes, 3 times a week for 4 weeks. Lumbar lordotic angle, low back pain, and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) were measured before and after the intervention. Results: Intragroup comparisons showed significant reductions in lumbar lordotic angle and low back pain in the static stretching group while the dynamic stretching group showed significant decreases in lumbar lordotic angle, low back pain, and ODI. The intergroup comparisons showed significantly greater differences between pre- and post-intervention in lumbar lordotic angle and low back pain in the dynamic stretching group compared to those in the static stretching group while ODI did not show any intergroup difference. Conclusions: The results of this study indicated that, while both static and dynamic stretching helped to reduce the lumbar lordotic angle and low back pain, dynamic stretching was more effective in alleviating lumbar lordotic angle and low back pain compared to static stretching.

Background: Limitations in hip flexion caused by tight hamstrings lead to excessive lumbar flexion and low back pain. Accordingly, many studies have examined how to stretch the hamstring muscle. However, no study has focused on the effect of hamstring eccentric exercise for tight hamstrings on trunk forward bending. Objects: We compared the short-term effect of hamstring eccentric exercise (HEE) and hamstring static stretching (HSS) on trunk forward bending in individuals with tight hamstrings. Methods: Thirty individuals with tight hamstrings participated in the study. The subjects were randomly allocated to either a HEE or HSS group. To determine whether the hamstrings were tight, the active knee extension (AKE) test was performed, and the degree of hip flexion was measured. To assess trunk forward bending, subjects performed the fingertip to floor (FTF) and modified modified Schober tests, and the degree of trunk forward bending was measured using an inclinometer. We used paired t-tests to compare the values before and after exercise in each group and independent t-tests to compare the two groups on various measures Results: The FTF test results were improved significantly after the exercise in both groups, and AKE for both legs increased significantly in both groups. There was no significant difference in the hip angles, mmS test results, or degree of trunk forward bending between groups after the exercise. No test results differed significantly between the two groups at baseline or after the exercise. Both groups increased hamstring flexibility and trunk forward bending. Conclusion: HSS and the HEE groups increased hamstring flexibility and trunk forward bending. However, HEE has additional benefits, such as injury prevention and muscle strengthening.

Background:Limitation of hamstring extensibility is often associated with various musculoskeletal problems such as alterations in posture and walking patterns. Thus, certain appropriate strategies need to be established for its management.Objects:The aim of this study was to compare the effects of the neural mobilization technique and static stretching exercises on popliteal angle and hamstring compliance in young women with short hamstring syndrome (SHS).Methods:Thirty-three women with SHS were randomly assigned to either group-1 (n1=17) that underwent the neural mobilization technique or group-2 (n2=16) that underwent the static stretching exercises. Outcome measures included the active popliteal angle (APA) and a hamstring’s electromyographic (EMG) activity at a maximum popliteal angle of the baseline. Intervention for each group was performed for a total time of 3-min (6 sets of a 30-sec application).Results:There were significant interactions between time and group in the APA [group-1 (pre-test to post-test): 69.70±8.14° to 74.14±8.07° and group-2: 68.66±7.42° to 70.52±7.92°] (F1,31=6.678, p=.015) and the EMG activity of the hamstring (group-1: 1.12±.30μV to .69±.31μV and group-2: 1.19±.49μV to 1.13±.47 μV)(F1,31=6.678, p=.015). Between-group comparison revealed that the EMG activity of the hamstring was significantly different at post-test between the groups (p<.05). Furthermore, in within-group comparison, group-1 appeared to be significantly different for both variables between pre- and post-test (p<.05); however, group-2 showed significant difference in only the APA between pre- and post-test (p<.05).Conclusion:These findings suggest that the neural mobilization technique and static stretching exercises may be advantageous to improve hamstring compliance in young women with SHS, resulting in a more favorable outcome in the neural mobilization technique.

The objective of this study was to determine the duration of maintained calf muscle flexibility gained in young adults with calf muscle tightness, as measured by increases in ankle active and passive dorsiflexion range of motion (DFROM) after three stretching interventions. Twenty subjects (5 men and 15 women) with calf muscle tightness received the following three stretching interventions in one leg (assigned at random): static stretching (SS), eccentric training on stable surface (ETS), and eccentric training on unstable surfaces (ETU). The subjects received all three interventions to the same leg, applied in a random order. Each intervention had a break of at least 24 h in-between, in order to minimize any carryover effect. Each intervention used two types of stretching: with the calf muscle stretched and both knees straight, and with the knee slightly bent in order to maximize the activation of the soleus muscle. All three interventions were performed for 200 seconds. We measured the duration of maintained calf muscle flexibility through active and passive ankle DFROM before intervention, immediately after intervention (time 0), and then 3, 6, 9, 15, and 30 min after intervention. We found a difference in the duration of maintained calf muscle flexibility between the three interventions. In the ETS and ETU interventions, a significant improvement in calf muscle flexibility, both ankle active and passive dorsiflexion ranges of motion (ADFROM and PDFROM), was maintained for 30 min. In the SS intervention, however, ADFROM before 9 min and PDFROM before 6 min were statistically different from the baseline. Our results suggest that ETS and ETU may be more effective than SS for maintaining calfmuscle flexibility in young adults.

The aim of this study was to compare the duration of hamstring flexibility improvement after 3 stretching interventions in people with limited hamstring flexibility. Twenty-two subjects (12 men, 10 women) with limited hamstring flexibility of the dominant leg received 3 stretching interventions— modified dynamic stretching (MDS), hold-relax (HR), and static stretching (SS)—in a random order. All the subjects received all 3 interventions at intervals of at least 24 hours to minimize any carry-over effect. Modified dynamic stretching was applied as a closed kinetic chain exercise in the supine position by using the sling suspension system (Redcord Trainer®). The SS and HR interventions were individually performed in the straight leg raising (SLR) position, and all 3 interventions were performed for 3 minutes. Outcome measures included passive knee extension (PKE) measurements. Five post-test measurements were recorded for all subjects at 3, 6, 9, 15, and 30 minutes after the interventions. MDS was associated with a significant increase in knee extension range of motion even at 30 minutes post-treatment. In contrast, the HR and SS stretching methods showed increased hamstring flexibility for only 6 minutes post-treatment. Improvements in the range of motion of knee extension (indicating enhancement in hamstring flexibility) with MDS were maintained longer than those with the HR and SS interventions. Therefore, MDS may be more effective than the other interventions for maintaining hamstring flexibility.

The purpose of this study was to examine the acute effects of nerve mobilization, static stretching, and hold-relax on the flexibility of hamstring muscles and their surface electromyographic (EMG) responses to passive stretches in poststroke hemiparesis. This study was a randomized cross-over trial. Fourteen subjects received three treatment sessions in random order with each consisting of ten repetitions. The treatment sessions included nerve mobilization, static stretching, and hold-relax. The treatment sessions were held at least 24 hours apart to minimize any carryover effect. The outcome was measured by the distance between the greater trochanter and lateral malleolus and hamstring EMG activity during passive knee extension stretching. Repeated-measures analysis of variance showed significant changes in hamstring flexibility and EMG activity in main effect of time pre, post and followup (p<.05). However, no significant differences occurred among the three stretching techniques. No technique was consistently found to be superior. The three stretching techniques in this study make it difficult to determine the most effective technique. Therefore, clinicians use nerve mobilization of effective stretching techniques with other stretching techniques.

The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of static stretching and Evjenth-Hamberg stretching the on range of motion (ROM) of the knee joint. The subjects were composed of twenty healthy males without weight-training experience. The ROM of the knee joint was measured by using an En-Knee. Three tests (performed on the 1st week, 4th week, and 8th week) were conducted to examine the change of each variable. Data were analyzed with a analysis of variance (grouptest) for repeated measures on last factor through SPSS 10.0. The data analysis revealed the change in the ROM was dependent on the stretching method. The results were as follows: The ROM was improved in both methods by each time, but the E-HS was more improved than the SS. In conclusion, this study indicated that the E-HS is more efficient than the SS on the ROM of the knee joint.

The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of one proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation technique and static stretching on calf muscle tightness. The subjects consist of 9 hemiplegics, and 9 quadriplegics. The eighteen subjects were randomly divided into 3 groups: prorioceptive neuromuscular facilitation(6 persons), static stretching(6 persons) and control(6 persons). Contract relax antagonist contract and static stretching techniques were applied continuously for twenty minutes each. Of the many proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation techniques, only the contract relax antagonist contract technique was applied. The static stretching technique was applied with the subject placed in standing on a seventy degree inclined tilt table for twenty minutes. A wedge was placed under the feet to obtain maximum dorsiflexion. Wedge thickness varied with each subject. Results revealed: (1) a significant difference between the experimental and the control groups(p<0.05). (2) a significant difference between contract relax antagonist contract and static stretching groups(p<0.05). (3) At day five, the final increments were: contract relax antagonist contract , static stretching (meanstandard deviation).