Effects of PIR and PFS on Pain, ROM, and Disabilty in Tight Hamstring Syndrome

Riphah International University

Status: Completed

Conditions: Disability; Flexibility; Range of Motion; Hamstrings

Treatments: Other: Post Facilitation stretch; Other: Post Isometric relaxation

Study type: Interventional

Funder types: Other

Identifiers

NCT06796491

REC/RCR&AHS/24/0155

Details and patient eligibility

About

This randomized clinical trial aims to compare the effects of post-isometric relaxation (PIR) and post-facilitation stretch (PFS) on pain, range of motion, and disability in individuals with tight hamstring syndrome. Conducted at Riphah Rehabilitation Clinic, Lahore, participants aged 18-35 years with posterior thigh pain will be divided into two groups. Both groups will receive hot pack therapy and core strengthening exercises, with Group A receiving PIR and Group B receiving PFS. Outcomes will be assessed at baseline and after 4 weeks using NPRS, a disability questionnaire, and a goniometer, with data analyzed using SPSS version 25.

Full description

Both PIR and PFS are subtypes of Muscle Energy Techniques (MET) that have shown potential in improving muscle flexibility and reducing discomfort. This study aims to address the impacts of PIR and PFS on pain, ROM, and disability in patients with tight hamstrings syndrome, providing valuable insights for clinical practice and enhancing the understanding of effective interventions for this common musculoskeletal issue.

The current literature on stretching techniques for musculoskeletal conditions reveals several gaps specifically relevant to the effects of Post Isometric Relaxation (PIR) and Post Facilitation Stretch (PFS) on tight hamstrings syndrome. Despite the high incidence of hamstring tightness and its association with conditions such as nonspecific low back pain, there is limited research directly comparing the effects of Post Isometric Relaxation (PIR) and Post Facilitation Stretch (PFS) on this condition. While studies have explored various stretching methods such as Muscle Energy Technique (MET), static stretching, and myofascial release, there is a notable lack of direct comparative research between PIR and PFS in patients with tight hamstrings. Additionally, existing studies had often focused on immediate or short-term outcomes, with limited investigation into the long-term effects of these techniques on pain, range of motion (ROM), and disability.

Enrollment: 46 patients

Sex: All

Ages: 18 to 35 years old

Volunteers: No Healthy Volunteers

Inclusion criteria

• Both male and female
• Age between 18 to 35 years(45)
• Bilateral hamstring muscle tightness
• Individuals having lack of Active knee extension more than 20 degrees(46)

Exclusion criteria

• Low back pain radiating to the back of thigh
• History of fracture, dislocation of hip(47)
• Acute or chronic hamstring injury
• Any neurological disease(48)
• Congenital deformity of the lower limb
• Inflammatory condition that affects motion
• A history of a cervical whiplash injury(45)

Trial design

Primary purpose: Treatment

Allocation: Randomized

Interventional model: Parallel Assignment

Masking: Double Blind

---

46 participants in 2 patient groups

Post Isometric Relaxation

Experimental group

Description:

Patient applied the sub-maximal contraction almost 20%. Isometric contraction will be held for 10 seconds and then slight stretch for 30 seconds will be maintained. 4 contractions per treatment with 3 seconds rest between each contraction. This protocol continues 3 days/week for 4 weeks

Treatment:

Other: Post Isometric relaxation

Post Facilitation Stretch

Active Comparator group

Description:

Isometric contraction will be held for 10 seconds and then slight stretch for 30 seconds will be maintained. 4 contractions per treatment with 3 seconds rest between each contraction. This protocol continues 3 days/week 4 weeks. for hamstring flexibility

Treatment:

Other: Post Facilitation stretch