The Effectiveness of PNF Versus Static Stretching on Increasing Hip-Flexion Range of Motion

PainSci » bibliography » Lempke et al 2018
updated Apr 30, 2021

Tags: stretch, hip, exercise, self-treatment, treatment, muscle

Two articles on PainSci cite Lempke 2018: 1. Quite a Stretch 2. The Complete Guide to Low Back Pain

PainSci commentary on Lempke 2018: ?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.

This is a review of five studies that tested both typical static stretching and proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation (PNF) stretching, an allegedly superior method that is widely known. In one study, PNF produced better results; in the other four, there was no significant difference. The authors concluded that “both static and PNF stretching effectively increase ROM; however, one does not appear to be more effective than the other.” PNF is not so advanced after all.

~ 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: Stretching is applied for the purposes of injury prevention, increasing joint range of motion (ROM), and increasing muscle extensibility. Many researchers have investigated various methods and techniques to determine the most effective way to increase joint ROM and muscle extensibility. Despite the numerous studies conducted, controversy still remains within clinical practice and the literature regarding the best methods and techniques for stretching.

Focused Clinical Question: Is proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation (PNF) stretching more effective than static stretching for increasing hamstring muscle extensibility through increased hip ROM or increased knee extension angle (KEA) in a physically active population?

Summary of Key Findings: Five studies met the inclusion criteria and were included. All 5 studies were randomized control trials examining mobility of the hamstring group. The studies measured hamstring ROM in a variety of ways. Three studies measured active KEA, 1 study measured passive KEA, and 1 study measured hip ROM via the single-leg raise test. Of the 5 studies, 1 study found greater improvements using PNF over static stretching for increasing hip flexion, and the remaining 4 studies found no significant difference between PNF stretching and static stretching in increasing muscle extensibility, active KEA, or hip ROM.

Clinical Bottom Line: PNF stretching was not demonstrated to be more effective at increasing hamstring extensibility compared to static stretching. The literature reviewed suggests both are effective methods for increasing hip-flexion ROM.

Strength of Recommendation: Using level 2 evidence and higher, the results show both static and PNF stretching effectively increase ROM; however, one does not appear to be more effective than the other.

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.

related content