Search

Context: The effects of an exercise program (EP) for the treatment of patellofemoral pain syndrome (PFPS) are well known. However, the effects of osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) are unclear., Objective: To evaluate the effects of OMT versus EP on knee pain, functionality, plantar pressure in middle foot (PPMF), posterior thigh flexibility (PTF), and range of motion of hip extension in runners with PFPS., Design: This is a randomized controlled trial., Setting: Human performance laboratory., Participants: A total of 82 runners with PFPS participated in this study., Interventions: The participants were randomized into 3 groups: OMT, EP, and control group. The OMT group received joint manipulation and myofascial release in the lumbar spine, hip, sacroiliac joint, knee, and ankle regions. The EP group performed specific exercises for lower limbs. The control group received no intervention., Main Outcome Measures: The main evaluations were pain through the visual analog scale, functionality through the Lysholm Knee Scoring Scale, dynamic knee valgus through the step-down test, PPMF through static baropodometry, PTF through the sit and reach test, and range of motion through fleximetry. The evaluations were performed before the interventions, after the 6 interventions, and at 30-day follow-up., Results: There was a significant pain decrease in the OMT and EP groups when compared with the control group. OMT group showed increased functionality, decreased PPMF, and increased PTF. The range of motion for hip extension increased only in the EP group., Conclusion: Both OMT and EP are effective in treating runners with PFPS.

Context: Hamstring muscle tightness is one of the most common problems in athletic and healthy people. Dry needling (DN) was found to be an effective approach for improving muscle flexibility, but there is no study to compare this approach with static stretching (SS) as a common technique for the increase of muscle length., Objective: To compare the immediate effects of DN and SS on hamstring flexibility in healthy subjects with hamstring tightness., Study Design: A single-blind randomized controlled trial., Setting: A musculoskeletal physiotherapy clinic at Tehran University of Medical Sciences., Subjects: Forty healthy subjects (female: 32, age range: 18-40 y) with hamstring tightness were randomly assigned into 2 groups of DN and SS., Intervention: The DN group received a single session of DN on 3 points of the hamstring muscles, each for 1 minute. The SS group received a single session of SS of the hamstrings, consisting of 3 sets of 30-second SS with a 10-second rest between sets in the active knee extension test (AKET) position., Main Outcome Measures: The AKET, muscle compliance, passive peak torque, and stretch tolerance were measured at the baseline, immediately, and 15 minutes after the interventions., Results: Improvements in all outcomes was better for the DN group than for the SS group. DN increased muscle compliance significantly 15 minutes after the intervention, but it did not improve in the SS group., Conclusion: DN is effective in improving hamstring flexibility compared with SS. One session of DN can be an effective treatment for hamstring tightness and increase hamstring flexibility. The improvements suggest that DN is a novel treatment for hamstring flexibility.

Clinical Scenario: Increasing the length of the muscle-tendon unit may prevent musculotendinous injury. Various methods have been proposed to increase muscle-tendon flexibility, including self-mobilization using foam rollers or roller massagers, although the effectiveness of these devices is uncertain. This review was conducted to determine if the use of foam rollers or roller massagers to improve hamstrings flexibility is supported by moderate- to high-quality evidence., Clinical Question: Are foam rollers or roller massagers effective for increasing hamstrings flexibility in asymptomatic physically active adults? Summary of Key Findings: The literature was searched for studies on the effects of using foam rollers or roller massagers to increase hamstrings flexibility in asymptomatic physically active adults. Four randomized controlled trials were included; 2 studies provided level 2 or 3 evidence regarding foam rollers and 2 studies provided level 2 or 3 evidence regarding roller massagers. Both roller-massager studies reported increases in hamstrings flexibility after treatment. Data from the foam-roller studies did not demonstrate a statistically significant increase in hamstrings flexibility, but 1 study did demonstrate a strong effect size. Clinical Bottom Line: The reviewed moderate-quality studies support the use of roller massagers but provide limited evidence on the effectiveness of foam rolling to increase hamstrings flexibility in asymptomatic physically active adults. Flexibility gains may be improved by a longer duration of treatment and administration by a trained therapist. Gains appear to decline rapidly postrolling. Neither device has been shown to confer a therapeutic benefit superior to static stretching, and the effectiveness of these devices for preventing injury is unknown. Strength of Recommendation: Grade B evidence supports the use of roller massagers to increase hamstrings flexibility in asymptomatic physically active adults.

Clinical Scenario: Hamstring tightness is common among physically active individuals. In addition to limiting range of motion and increasing the risk of muscle strain, hamstring tightness contributes to a variety of orthopedic conditions. Therefore, clinicians continue to identify effective methods to increase flexibility. Although hamstring tightness is typically treated with common stretching techniques such as static stretching and proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation, it has been suggested that whole-body-vibration (WBV) training may improve hamstring flexibility., Clinical Question: Can WBV training, used in isolation or in combination with common stretching protocols or exercise, improve hamstring flexibility in physically active young adults? Summary of Key Findings: Of the included studies, 4 demonstrated statistically significant improvements in hamstring flexibility in the intervention group, and 1 study found minor improvements over time in the intervention group after treatment. Clinical Bottom Line: There is moderate evidence to support the use of WBV training to improve hamstring flexibility in physically active young adults., Strength of Recommendation: There is grade B evidence that WBV training improves hamstring flexibility in physically active adults. The Centre of Evidence Based Medicine recommends a grade of B for level 2 evidence with consistent findings.