2013The Journal of Strength and Conditioning ResearchRequires access

A Comparison of Self-administered Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation to Static Stretching on Range of Motion and Flexibility

Jason Wicke, Kamar Gainey, Michael A. Figueroa

Open publisher page 49 citations

Abstract

Stretching is known to be an effective method for increasing range of motion. Proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation (PNF) is a stretching technique that is often associated with a partner. The goal of this study was to examine the changes in hip range of motion (ROM) and hip, back and shoulder flexibility (HBSF) after an intervention of self-administered PNF vs. traditional static stretching. Nineteen healthy college-aged individuals (ages 19-25 years) completed the study. Participants were tested preintervention and postintervention for hip ROM and HBSF using a goniometer and sit-and-reach test, respectively. Interventions included static or self-PNF hamstring stretching 2 × 40 seconds on each leg for 6 weeks. Participants were randomly placed in a group, and upon completion of the intervention and a 1-week rest period, they repeated the process with the other intervention. Statistical analysis revealed that there was a significant difference (p < 0.01) in the change in hip ROM and HBSF between the static stretch and self-PNF group. Mean and SD changes in the hip ROM were -6.2 ± 6.6° vs. 0.6 ± 4.5° for the PNF and static groups, respectively (where a negative value indicates an increase in ROM) and 5.2 ± 3.3 cm vs. 2.0 ± 2.6 cm, respectively, for HSBF. In addition, significant improvements (using 99% confidence intervals) were found in the 2 measures after the PNF intervention but only in HBSF after the static stretching intervention. These results suggest that self-PNF can be used in place of static stretching, does not require a partner, and gives control of the stretching to the individual.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Stretching is known to be an effective method for increasing range of motion. Proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation (PNF) is a stretching technique that is often associated with a partner. The goal of this study was to examine the changes in hip range of motion (ROM) and hip, back and shoulder flexibility (HBSF) after an intervention of self-administered PNF vs. traditional static stretching. Nineteen healthy college-aged individuals (ages 19-25 years) completed the study. Participants were tested preintervention and postintervention for hip ROM and HBSF using a goniometer and sit-and-reach test, respectively. Interventions included static or self-PNF hamstring stretching 2 × 40 seconds on each leg for 6 weeks. Participants were randomly placed in a group, and upon completion of the intervention and a 1-week rest period, they repeated the process with the other intervention. Statistical analysis revealed that there was a significant difference (p < 0.01) in the change in hip ROM and HBSF between the static stretch and self-PNF group. Mean and SD changes in the hip ROM were -6.2 ± 6.6° vs. 0.6 ± 4.5° for the PNF and static groups, respectively (where a negative value indicates an increase in ROM) and 5.2 ± 3.3 cm vs. 2.0 ± 2.6 cm, respectively, for HSBF. In addition, significant improvements (using 99% confidence intervals) were found in the 2 measures after the PNF intervention but only in HBSF after the static stretching intervention. These results suggest that self-PNF can be used in place of static stretching, does not require a partner, and gives control of the stretching to the individual.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 49 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Stretching is known to be an effective method for increasing range of motion. Proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation (PNF) is a stretching technique that is often associated with a partner. The goal of this study was to examine the changes in hip range of motion (ROM) and hip, back and shoulder flexibility (HBSF) after an intervention of self-administered PNF vs. traditional static stretching. Nineteen healthy college-aged individuals (ages 19-25 years) completed the study. Participants were tested preintervention and postintervention for hip ROM and HBSF using a goniometer and sit-and-reach test, respectively. Interventions included static or self-PNF hamstring stretching 2 × 40 seconds on each leg for 6 weeks. Participants were randomly placed in a group, and upon completion of the intervention and a 1-week rest period, they repeated the process with the other intervention. Statistical analysis revealed that there was a significant difference (p < 0.01) in the change in hip ROM and HBSF between the static stretch and self-PNF group. Mean and SD changes in the hip ROM were -6.2 ± 6.6° vs. 0.6 ± 4.5° for the PNF and static groups, respectively (where a negative value indicates an increase in ROM) and 5.2 ± 3.3 cm vs. 2.0 ± 2.6 cm, respectively, for HSBF. In addition, significant improvements (using 99% confidence intervals) were found in the 2 measures after the PNF intervention but only in HBSF after the static stretching intervention. These results suggest that self-PNF can be used in place of static stretching, does not require a partner, and gives control of the stretching to the individual.

Key concepts: Static stretching, Range of motion, Proprioception, Flexibility (engineering), Physical therapy, Physical medicine and rehabilitation, Hamstring, Facilitation

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
A Comparison of Self-administered Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation to Static Stretching on Range of Motion and Flexibility — Research Paper | ScholarLens