One article on PainSci cites Hill 2017: Quite a Stretch
PainSci commentary on Hill 2017: ?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 wherever possible.
Based on just five eligible studies out of 195, this review concludes that there were “consistent findings from multiple low-quality studies that indicate there is no difference in the immediate improvements in hamstring flexibility when comparing proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation [contract-relax] stretching programs to static stretching programs in physically active adults.” Clearly the evidence is limited, but if there’s a signal in that mess, it’s a weak one.
~ Paul Ingraham
Common issues and characteristics relevant to this paper: ?Scientific papers have many common characteristics, flaws, and limitations, and many of these are rarely or never acknowledged in the paper itself, or even by other reviewers. I have reviewed thousands of papers, and described many of these issues literally hundreds of times. Eventually I got sick of repeating myself, and so now I just refer to a list common characteristics, especially flaws. Not every single one of them applies perfectly to every paper, but if something is listed here, it is relevant in some way. Note that in the case of reviews, the issue may apply to the science being reviewed, and not the review itself.
- Garbage in, garbage out — not enough good quality data to meaningfully review/analyze.
- Negative (or only barely positive) results despite a significant risk of bias that should tend to generate false positives.
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.
Clinical Scenario: Increasing hamstring flexibility through clinical stretching interventions may be an effective means to prevent hamstring injuries. However the most effective method to increase hamstring flexibility has yet to be determined. CLINICAL QUESTION: For a healthy individual, are proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation (PNF) stretching programs more effective in immediately improving hamstring flexibility when compared with static stretching programs? Summary of Key Findings: A thorough literature search returned 195 possible studies; 5 studies met the inclusion criteria and were included. Current evidence supports the use of PNF stretching or static stretching programs for increasing hamstring flexibility. However, neither program demonstrated superior effectiveness when examining immediate increases in hamstring flexibility. Clinical Bottom Line: There were consistent findings from multiple low-quality studies that indicate there is no difference in the immediate improvements in hamstring flexibility when comparing PNF stretching programs to static stretching programs in physically active adults. Strength of Recommendation: Grade B evidence exists that PNF and static stretching programs equally increase hamstring flexibility immediately following the stretching program.
- “Uninvolved versus target muscle contraction during contract: relax proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation stretching,” Daniel Camara Azevedo, Raphael Marques Melo, Ricardo Vidal Alves Corrêa, and Gordon Chalmers, Physical Therapy in Sport, 2011.
- “The Effectiveness of PNF Versus Static Stretching on Increasing Hip-Flexion Range of Motion,” Landon Lempke, Rebecca Wilkinson, Caitlin Murray, and Justin Stanek, Journal of Sport Rehabilitation, 2018.
This page is part of the PainScience BIBLIOGRAPHY, which contains plain language summaries of thousands of scientific papers & others sources. It’s like a highly specialized blog. A few highlights:
- Association of Lumbar MRI Findings with Current and Future Back Pain in a Population-based Cohort Study. Kasch 2022 Spine (Phila Pa 1976).
- A double-blinded randomised controlled study of the value of sequential intravenous and oral magnesium therapy in patients with chronic low back pain with a neuropathic component. Yousef 2013 Anaesthesia.
- Is Neck Posture Subgroup in Late Adolescence a Risk Factor for Persistent Neck Pain in Young Adults? A Prospective Study. Richards 2021 Phys Ther.
- Sudden amnesia resulting in pain relief: the relationship between memory and pain. Choi 2007 Pain.
- Photobiomodulation therapy is not better than placebo in patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain: a randomised placebo-controlled trial. Guimarães 2021 Pain.