Is proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation (PNF) more effective than Muscle Energy Technique (MET) in order to increase hamstring flexibility? A randomised controlled study.
Item
- Title
- Is proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation (PNF) more effective than Muscle Energy Technique (MET) in order to increase hamstring flexibility? A randomised controlled study.
- Author(s)
- Careddu, E
- Abstract
- Purpose: To compare the immediate effects of Muscle Energy Technique (MET) versus Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation (PNF) on hamstrings of healthy, asymptomatic subjects in order to investigate which of the two techniques results more effective in increase hamstring flexibility in the acute intervention. The author wanted to investigate, as a variable between the 2 techniques, the percentage of Maximal Voluntary Isometric Contraction (MVIC) set at 70% for PNF and Methods: The author used the following search engines: Google scholar, EBSCOhost. The author used the following databases: SwetsWise, Science Direct, PubMed, Springerlink, Alice (for previous dissertation/projects) and used the Boolean phrase "Muscle energy technique" OR "proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation" OR "contract- relax" OR "hold-relax" followed by the addition of one of either: hamstring flexibility, postural sway, posture, low back, injury and rehabilitation. The aim of the present study was to try to consider only previous studies and research dating back to 2002. The experiment for this dissertation took place at Boxley house, Maidstone, Kent and involved 60 subjects who were randomly assigned to one of 3 groups: MET(Male)Female: ratio 1.1/1 BMI: 22.8 SD 1.96 and AGE: 25.6 :t: SD 4.5), PNF {male/female ratio 1.1:1, BMI 23,0 ::l:: SD 1.62 and AGE 30 :t: SD 8.95) CONTROL {male/female: ratio 1.1:1, BMI: 22.1 :tSD 2.12 and AGE: 26 ::t: SD 6.68) All the subjects hamstrings flexibility were evaluated pre and post intervention by mean of the Back Saver Sit-and-Reach test (BSSR). The subjects who were allocated to treatment had MET or PNF randomly assigned as first technique to be applied always on right hamstrings first, whereas the left hamstring received the remaining technique of the two. Data where analysed with a 3 factorial One-Way ANOVA (intervention: CONTROL, MET and PNF) and Scheffe post-hoc test. Results: The effect of both MET and PNF were found to be statistically significant in demonstrating an acute change in hamstring flexibility when compared with CONTROL with p values respectively of 0.001 and 0.000 although MET failed to produce any statistical significance in percentage of change with a p value of 0.106 whereas PNF demonstrated a p value of 0.106 whereas PNF demonstrated a p value od 0.001.
- presented at
- European School of Osteopathy
- Date Accepted
- 2013
- Date Submitted
- 20.1.2015 16:42:55
- Type
- osteo_thesis
- Language
- English
- Submitted by:
- 62
- Pub-Identifier
- 15441
- Inst-Identifier
- 1229
- Keywords
- Hamstring flexibility.
- Recommended
- 0
- Item sets
- Thesis
Careddu, E, “Is proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation (PNF) more effective than Muscle Energy Technique (MET) in order to increase hamstring flexibility? A randomised controlled study.”, Osteopathic Research Web, accessed May 17, 2024, https://www.osteopathicresearch.com/s/orw/item/723