Mulligan Techniques for Gait and Pelvic Motion in Short Hamstrings
The Effect of Two Different Mulligan Techniques on Spatiotemporal Parameters and Pelvic Oscillation in Individuals With Hamstring Tightness: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Various stretching methods have been developed to reduce hamstring tightness and improve flexibility. Static stretching is one of the safest and most common methods used to increase muscle length; however, its effect is temporary and diminishes rapidly. Additionally, such conventional methods can be uncomfortable and require longer periods to yield visible results. Unlike other mobilization procedures, the Mulligan concept is performed while patients execute a resisted muscle contraction or move actively or passively. Distinct from many other manual therapy approaches, this technique is applied within a symptom-free range of motion, which likely enhances its safety. Traction Straight Leg Raise (TSLR) and Bent Leg Raise (BLR) techniques are specific interventions defined by Mulligan. There are limited studies in the literature investigating the effects of these two techniques on hamstring flexibility. However, no study has compared these two techniques in terms of spatiotemporal gait parameters and pelvic oscillations. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to compare the effects of BLR and TSLR techniques applied to individuals with hamstring tightness on hamstring flexibility, spatiotemporal parameters of gait, and pelvic oscillations.
Visão geral do estudo
Status
Status
Condições
Condições
Intervenção / Tratamento
Intervenção / Tratamento
Descrição detalhada
Flexibility holds a significant place among health-related physical fitness parameters and is defined as the normal range of motion achievable by a joint and/or joint complexes. Muscle flexibility is crucial for maintaining optimal muscle functionality and proper biomechanics. Limited flexibility leads to various musculoskeletal symptoms, postural deformities, and gait limitations. Reduced flexibility is commonly observed in fast-twitch and biarticular muscles, with the hamstring muscles being a prime example. The length of the hamstring muscles plays an essential role in human movement, including gait. Hamstring tightness reduces the ability to absorb shocks applied to the lower extremity and knee extension during walking, thereby decreasing step length. Individuals with hamstring tightness do not exhibit a normal gait pattern, particularly during the mid-swing and terminal swing phases. Furthermore, hamstring tightness results in reduced pelvic mobility. Decreased hamstring flexibility is a frequently observed finding in numerous musculoskeletal problems of the knee, hip, and lumbar regions. By disrupting the muscle length-tension relationship in the posterior kinetic chain, it has been specifically associated with clinical conditions such as low back pain, patellofemoral pain syndrome, and posterior pelvic tilt. Therefore, addressing this tightness stands out as a major goal in rehabilitation and exercise programs. Traction Straight Leg Raise (TSLR) and Bent Leg Raise (BLR) techniques are specific interventions. Only a limited number of studies have compared these two methods in individuals with hamstring tightness. Kapadia and Meshram reported that both of Mulligan's TSLR and BLR techniques are effective in improving hamstring muscle flexibility in healthy individuals; however, they noted that the TSLR technique was superior in enhancing flexibility. Priyanka et al. applied TSLR and BLR interventions to collegiate cricket players for a duration of two weeks and concluded that the BLR technique was more effective in increasing hamstring muscle flexibility compared to the TSLR technique. Furthermore, Bhosle and Rizvi investigated the treatment of sewing machine operators with hamstring tightness and low back pain, finding that both Mulligan BLR and TSLR techniques were effective in increasing hamstring flexibility and reducing low back pain-related disability, with no significant superiority of one technique over the other.
A review of the current literature reveals conflicting results regarding the efficacy of these techniques on hamstring flexibility. Furthermore, no study to date has compared these two techniques in terms of spatiotemporal gait parameters and pelvic oscillations. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to compare the effects of Mulligan TSLR and BLR techniques on hamstring flexibility, spatiotemporal gait parameters, and pelvic oscillations in individuals with hamstring tightness.
Tipo de estudo
Tipo de estudo
Inscrição (Real)
Inscrição
Estágio
Estágio
- Não aplicável
Contactos e Locais
Locais de estudo
-
-
Ankara
-
Pursaklar, Ankara, Turquia (Türkiye), 06145
- Gazi University
-
-
Critérios de participação
Critérios de elegibilidade
Critérios de elegibilidade
Idades elegíveis para estudo
Aceita Voluntários Saudáveis
Gêneros Elegíveis para o Estudo
Descrição
Inclusion Criteria:
- Individuals between the ages of 18 and 35
- Individuals who bilateral hamstring shortness
Exclusion Criteria:
- A passive knee extension angle of 20° or less
- A history of lower extremity pain or injury within the last 6 months
- Previous lower extremity surgery
- Neurological, rheumatological, or systemic diseases
- Poor cooperation for activities
- Regular participation in sports.
Plano de estudo
Como o estudo é projetado?
Detalhes do projeto
- Finalidade Principal: Tratamento
- Alocação: Randomizado
- Modelo Intervencional: Atribuição Paralela
- Mascaramento: Solteiro
Número de braços
Armas e Intervenções
Grupo de Participantes / BraçoGrupo de Participantes / Braço |
Intervenção / TratamentoIntervenção / Tratamento |
|---|---|
|
Experimental: Mulligan Bent Leg Raise (BLR) Technique
17 individuals in this group, after evaluations, mobilization with movement technique applied by clinians and after that same evaluations will be applied. |
The participant's flexed knee was supported on the therapist's shoulder. Following a resisted leg push and relaxation, the therapist passively moved the knee toward the ipsilateral shoulder to the maximum pain-free range. If pain occurred, the leg was shifted medially or laterally to find a pain-free pathway. |
|
Experimental: Mulligan Traction Straight Leg Raise (TSLR) Technique
17 individuals in this group, after evaluations, mobilization with movement technique applied by clinians and after that same evaluations will be applied. |
In a supine position with the knee extended and hip neutral, maximum longitudinal traction was applied to the lower extremity. The limb was passively raised (SLR) until the onset of discomfort and immediately returned to the resting position. If pain was indicated, the movement direction was modified by adding abduction and/or rotation to ensure a pain-free pathway. |
O que o estudo está medindo?
Medidas de resultados primários
Medidas de resultados primários
Medida de resultado |
Descrição da medida |
Prazo |
|---|---|---|
|
Passive knee extension test
Prazo: Measurements were taken at three time points: before the intervention, immediately following the intervention, and 24 hours later.
|
the participant was supine with the tested hip flexed to 90° and the femur stabilized. The contralateral leg remained flat on the table. A goniometer was placed with its axis on the lateral femoral epicondyle, the stationary arm aligned with the greater trochanter, and the moving arm with the lateral malleolus. The knee was passively extended until a stretch was felt or hip flexion was compromised, marking the test endpoint. |
Measurements were taken at three time points: before the intervention, immediately following the intervention, and 24 hours later.
|
Medidas de resultados secundários
Medidas de resultados secundários
Medida de resultado |
Descrição da medida |
Prazo |
|---|---|---|
|
Cadence (step / min) during gait
Prazo: Measurements were taken at three time points: before the intervention, immediately following the intervention, and 24 hours later.
|
"Cadence" (steps/min) is the number of steps in a minute. Cadence during gait was assessed using a BTS G-Walk accelerometer secured at the L4-L5 level. Participants walked at a normal pace along a 10-meter marked track and returned. Data were transmitted via Bluetooth to G-Studio software for analysis. |
Measurements were taken at three time points: before the intervention, immediately following the intervention, and 24 hours later.
|
|
Speed (m / s) during gait
Prazo: Measurements were taken at three time points: before the intervention, immediately following the intervention, and 24 hours later
|
Speed (m/s) parameters is average walking speed. Speed during gait was assessed using a BTS G-Walk accelerometer secured at the L4-L5 level. Participants walked at a normal pace along a 10-meter marked track and returned. Data were transmitted via Bluetooth to G-Studio software for analysis. |
Measurements were taken at three time points: before the intervention, immediately following the intervention, and 24 hours later
|
|
Gait cycle duration (s) during gait
Prazo: Measurements were taken at three time points: before the intervention, immediately following the intervention, and 24 hours later
|
Gait cycle duration (s) parameter is average value of the time interval between two consecutive heel strikes of the same foot. Gait cycle duration were assessed using a BTS G-Walk accelerometer secured at the L4-L5 level. Participants walked at a normal pace along a 10-meter marked track and returned. Data were transmitted via Bluetooth to G-Studio software for analysis. |
Measurements were taken at three time points: before the intervention, immediately following the intervention, and 24 hours later
|
|
Stride length (m) during gait
Prazo: Measurements were taken at three time points: before the intervention, immediately following the intervention, and 24 hours later.
|
Stride length (m) is the average value of distances between each initial contact and the next one of the same side. Stride length during gait was assessed using a BTS G-Walk accelerometer secured at the L4-L5 level. Participants walked at a normal pace along a 10-meter marked track and returned. Data were transmitted via Bluetooth to G-Studio software for analysis. |
Measurements were taken at three time points: before the intervention, immediately following the intervention, and 24 hours later.
|
|
Stance phase (% cycle) during gait
Prazo: Measurements were taken at three time points: before the intervention, immediately following the intervention, and 24 hours later.
|
Stance phase (% cycle) is the average value of the duration of the right and left foot support phase as percentage of the gait cycle. Stance phase during gait was assessed using a BTS G-Walk accelerometer secured at the L4-L5 level. Participants walked at a normal pace along a 10-meter marked track and returned. Data were transmitted via Bluetooth to G-Studio software for analysis. |
Measurements were taken at three time points: before the intervention, immediately following the intervention, and 24 hours later.
|
|
Swing phase (% cycle) during gait
Prazo: Measurements were taken at three time points: before the intervention, immediately following the intervention, and 24 hours later.
|
Swing phase (% cycle) is average value of the duration of the right and left swing phase as percentage of the gait cycle. Swing phase during gait was assessed using a BTS G-Walk accelerometer secured at the L4-L5 level. Participants walked at a normal pace along a 10-meter marked track and returned. Data were transmitted via Bluetooth to G-Studio software for analysis. |
Measurements were taken at three time points: before the intervention, immediately following the intervention, and 24 hours later.
|
|
Pelvic tilt range (degrees) during gait
Prazo: Measurements were taken at three time points: before the intervention, immediately following the intervention, and 24 hours later.
|
The angles average value described by the pelvis in the 3 main body planes (sagittal, frontal and transversal), are represented in three graphs: The sagittal plane component describes the pelvic tilt. Pelvic tilt range during gait were assessed using a BTS G-Walk accelerometer secured at the L4-L5 level. Participants walked at a normal pace along a 10-meter marked track and returned. Data were transmitted via Bluetooth to G-Studio software for analysis. |
Measurements were taken at three time points: before the intervention, immediately following the intervention, and 24 hours later.
|
|
Pelvic obliquity range (degrees) during gait
Prazo: Measurements were taken at three time points: before the intervention, immediately following the intervention, and 24 hours later.
|
The angles average value described by the pelvis in the 3 main body planes (sagittal, frontal and transversal), are represented in three graphs: the frontal plane component describes the pelvic obliquity. Pelvic obliquity range during gait analysis was assessed using a BTS G-Walk accelerometer secured at the L4-L5 level. Participants walked at a normal pace along a 10-meter marked track and returned. Data were transmitted via Bluetooth to G-Studio software for analysis. |
Measurements were taken at three time points: before the intervention, immediately following the intervention, and 24 hours later.
|
|
Pelvic rotation range (degrees) during gait
Prazo: Measurements were taken at three time points: before the intervention, immediately following the intervention, and 24 hours later.
|
The angles average value described by the pelvis in the 3 main body planes (sagittal, frontal and transversal), are represented in three graphs: the transversal plane component describes the pelvic rotation. Pelvic rotation range during gait were assessed using a BTS G-Walk accelerometer secured at the L4-L5 level. Participants walked at a normal pace along a 10-meter marked track and returned. Data were transmitted via Bluetooth to G-Studio software for analysis. |
Measurements were taken at three time points: before the intervention, immediately following the intervention, and 24 hours later.
|
Colaboradores e Investigadores
Patrocinador
Patrocinador
Colaboradores
Colaboradores
Datas de registro do estudo
Datas Principais do Estudo
Início do estudo (Real)
Início do estudo
Conclusão Primária (Real)
Conclusão Primária
Conclusão do estudo (Real)
Conclusão do estudo
Datas de inscrição no estudo
Enviado pela primeira vez
Enviado pela primeira vez
Enviado pela primeira vez que atendeu aos critérios de CQ
Enviado pela primeira vez que atendeu aos critérios de CQ
Primeira postagem (Real)
Primeira postagem
Atualizações de registro de estudo
Última Atualização Postada (Real)
Última Atualização Postada
Última atualização enviada que atendeu aos critérios de controle de qualidade
Última atualização enviada que atendeu aos critérios de controle de qualidade
Última verificação
Última verificação
Mais Informações
Termos relacionados a este estudo
Palavras-chave
Termos MeSH relevantes adicionais
Outros números de identificação do estudo
Outros números de identificação do estudo
- 2025 - 977
Plano para dados de participantes individuais (IPD)
Planeja compartilhar dados de participantes individuais (IPD)?
Informações sobre medicamentos e dispositivos, documentos de estudo
Estuda um medicamento regulamentado pela FDA dos EUA
Estuda um produto de dispositivo regulamentado pela FDA dos EUA
Essas informações foram obtidas diretamente do site clinicaltrials.gov sem nenhuma alteração. Se você tiver alguma solicitação para alterar, remover ou atualizar os detalhes do seu estudo, entre em contato com register@clinicaltrials.gov. Assim que uma alteração for implementada em clinicaltrials.gov, ela também será atualizada automaticamente em nosso site .