Quantitative analysis of the relative effectiveness of 3 iliotibial band stretches
PainSci summary of Fredericson 2002?This page is one of thousands in the PainScience.com bibliography. It is not a general article: it is focused on a single scientific paper, and it may provide only just enough context for the summary to make sense. Links to other papers and more general information are provided at the bottom of the page, as often as possible. ★★☆☆☆?2-star ratings are for studies with flaws, bias, and/or conflict of interest; published in lesser journals. Ratings are a highly subjective opinion, and subject to revision at any time. If you think this paper has been incorrectly rated, please let me know.
From the abstract: “Adding an overhead arm extension to the most common standing ITB stretch may increase average ITB length change and average external adduction moments in elite-level distance runners.” Khaund notes that “Although this study, demonstrates the effectiveness of stretching the iliotibial band, participants in the study did not have iliotibial band syndrome and studies have not demonstrated that stretching hastens recovery from the syndrome.”
original abstract†Abstracts here may not perfectly match originals, for a variety of technical and practical reasons. Some abstacts are truncated for my purposes here, if they are particularly long-winded and unhelpful. I occasionally add clarifying notes. And I make some minor corrections.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the relative effectiveness of 3 common standing stretches for the iliotibial band (ITB): arms at side (stretch A), arms extending overhead (stretch B), and arms reaching diagonally downward (stretch C).
DESIGN: Each subject's biomechanics was captured as a 3-dimensional image by using a 4-camera gait acquisition system with a forceplate.
SETTING: University biomotion laboratory.
PARTICIPANTS: Five male elite-level distance runners.
INTERVENTIONS: All participants performed each of the 3 standing stretches for the ITB.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: For each stretch, change in ITB tissue length and the force generated within the stretched complex was measured. Data were then combined and analyzed by using kinetic values assessment.
RESULTS: All 3 stretches created statistically significant changes in ITB length (P<.05), but stretch B, incorporating overhead arm extension, was consistently most effective both for average ITB length change and average adduction moments at the hip and knee.
CONCLUSIONS: Adding an overhead arm extension to the most common standing ITB stretch may increase average ITB length change and average external adduction moments in elite-level distance runners.
related content
These three articles on PainScience.com cite Fredericson 2002 as a source:
- PS Save Yourself from IT Band Syndrome! — All your treatment options for Iliotibial Band Syndrome reviewed in great detail, with clear explanations of recent scientific research supporting every key point
- PS Save Yourself from Patellofemoral Pain Syndrome! — Patellofemoral pain syndrome (aka runner’s knee) explained and discussed in great detail, including every imaginable self-treatment option and all the available scientific evidence
- PS IT Band Stretching Does Not Work — Stretching the iliotibial band is a popular idea, but it’s very hard to do it right, and it’s probably not worth it
