Ignite Creation Date:
2025-12-25 @ 3:48 AM
Ignite Modification Date:
2025-12-26 @ 2:35 AM
Study NCT ID:
NCT07167602
Status:
COMPLETED
Last Update Posted:
2025-09-11
First Post:
2025-09-04
Is NOT Gene Therapy:
False
Has Adverse Events:
False
Brief Title:
Effect of Active and Positional Release on Hamstring Flexibility in Athletes
Sponsor:
University of Lahore
Organization:
Study Overview
Official Title:
Active Versus Positional Release Therapy in Athletes With Hamstring Shortening
Status:
COMPLETED
Status Verified Date:
2025-09
Last Known Status:
None
Delayed Posting:
No
If Stopped, Why?:
Not Stopped
Has Expanded Access:
False
If Expanded Access, NCT#:
N/A
Has Expanded Access, NCT# Status:
N/A
Acronym:
None
Brief Summary:
Hamstring shortening is common in athletes and often causes pain, limited flexibility, and reduced function, which negatively impact performance. Manual therapy techniques such as Active Release Therapy (ART) and Positional Release Therapy (PRT) are frequently used, but their comparative effectiveness remains unclear.
This randomized, single-blinded clinical trial enrolled 74 athletes aged 18-35 years with hamstring shortening at the University of Lahore. Participants were randomly assigned to receive either PRT with conventional physiotherapy (hot pack, TENS, stretching, ankle pumps) or ART with the same physiotherapy protocol. Each group received two supervised sessions per week for four weeks.
The primary outcomes were pain (Numeric Pain Rating Scale), range of motion (Popliteal Angle), and functional ability (Lower Extremity Functional Scale). The Active Knee Extension test was used as a secondary outcome.
This study seeks to determine which manual therapy approach provides greater improvements in pain, flexibility, and function, with the goal of guiding evidence-based rehabilitation for athletes.
This randomized, single-blinded clinical trial enrolled 74 athletes aged 18-35 years with hamstring shortening at the University of Lahore. Participants were randomly assigned to receive either PRT with conventional physiotherapy (hot pack, TENS, stretching, ankle pumps) or ART with the same physiotherapy protocol. Each group received two supervised sessions per week for four weeks.
The primary outcomes were pain (Numeric Pain Rating Scale), range of motion (Popliteal Angle), and functional ability (Lower Extremity Functional Scale). The Active Knee Extension test was used as a secondary outcome.
This study seeks to determine which manual therapy approach provides greater improvements in pain, flexibility, and function, with the goal of guiding evidence-based rehabilitation for athletes.
Detailed Description:
Hamstring shortening, also referred to as short hamstring syndrome, is a frequent condition in athletes and has been linked to pain, reduced range of motion, and functional limitations that affect both sports performance and quality of life. Studies suggest that up to two-thirds of athletes may experience hamstring tightness, often as a result of repetitive strain, muscle imbalance, or inadequate recovery. Addressing this condition is therefore a priority in sports rehabilitation to minimize risk of injury and optimize performance.
Manual therapy is widely used in clinical practice to manage hamstring-related impairments. Among the commonly applied methods, Active Release Therapy (ART) aims to release adhesions and improve soft tissue mobility through tension and guided movements, while Positional Release Therapy (PRT) works by placing the muscle in a position of comfort to promote relaxation and reduce neuromuscular tension. Although both techniques have shown promise individually, limited evidence exists directly comparing their effectiveness in athletes with hamstring shortening.
This single-site, single-blinded randomized controlled trial was conducted at the University of Lahore Teaching Hospital to address this gap. Seventy-four athletes between 18 and 35 years of age were recruited using convenience sampling and randomized to one of two groups. Group A received Positional Release Therapy in addition to conventional physiotherapy, while Group B received Active Release Therapy with the same physiotherapy protocol. Conventional care included hot pack application, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, hamstring stretching, and ankle pumps. Both groups received two sessions per week for four weeks, with outcome measures collected at baseline and post-intervention. The primary outcome measures were pain intensity, hamstring flexibility, and lower limb function, assessed respectively using the Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS), Popliteal Angle test, and Lower Extremity Functional Scale (LEFS). The Active Knee Extension (AKE) test was included as a secondary outcome. The study design incorporated allocation concealment with sealed envelopes, blinding of assessors, and standardized protocols to minimize bias.
By directly comparing PRT and ART, this trial aims to provide evidence to guide clinical decision-making for the management of hamstring shortening in athletes. The results may inform physiotherapists, sports medicine professionals, and rehabilitation specialists about the relative benefits of each technique and support the use of effective, evidence-based interventions to improve pain, flexibility, and function in athletic populations.
Manual therapy is widely used in clinical practice to manage hamstring-related impairments. Among the commonly applied methods, Active Release Therapy (ART) aims to release adhesions and improve soft tissue mobility through tension and guided movements, while Positional Release Therapy (PRT) works by placing the muscle in a position of comfort to promote relaxation and reduce neuromuscular tension. Although both techniques have shown promise individually, limited evidence exists directly comparing their effectiveness in athletes with hamstring shortening.
This single-site, single-blinded randomized controlled trial was conducted at the University of Lahore Teaching Hospital to address this gap. Seventy-four athletes between 18 and 35 years of age were recruited using convenience sampling and randomized to one of two groups. Group A received Positional Release Therapy in addition to conventional physiotherapy, while Group B received Active Release Therapy with the same physiotherapy protocol. Conventional care included hot pack application, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, hamstring stretching, and ankle pumps. Both groups received two sessions per week for four weeks, with outcome measures collected at baseline and post-intervention. The primary outcome measures were pain intensity, hamstring flexibility, and lower limb function, assessed respectively using the Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS), Popliteal Angle test, and Lower Extremity Functional Scale (LEFS). The Active Knee Extension (AKE) test was included as a secondary outcome. The study design incorporated allocation concealment with sealed envelopes, blinding of assessors, and standardized protocols to minimize bias.
By directly comparing PRT and ART, this trial aims to provide evidence to guide clinical decision-making for the management of hamstring shortening in athletes. The results may inform physiotherapists, sports medicine professionals, and rehabilitation specialists about the relative benefits of each technique and support the use of effective, evidence-based interventions to improve pain, flexibility, and function in athletic populations.
Study Oversight
Has Oversight DMC:
True
Is a FDA Regulated Drug?:
False
Is a FDA Regulated Device?:
False
Is an Unapproved Device?:
None
Is a PPSD?:
None
Is a US Export?:
None
Is an FDA AA801 Violation?: