Lakehead University Library Logo
    • Login
    View Item 
    •   Knowledge Commons
    • Electronic Theses and Dissertations
    • Electronic Theses and Dissertations from 2009
    • View Item
    •   Knowledge Commons
    • Electronic Theses and Dissertations
    • Electronic Theses and Dissertations from 2009
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.
    quick search

    Browse

    All of Knowledge CommonsCommunities & CollectionsBy Issue DateAuthorTitleSubjectDisciplineAdvisorCommittee MemberThis CollectionBy Issue DateAuthorTitleSubjectDisciplineAdvisorCommittee Member

    My Account

    Login

    Statistics

    View Usage Statistics

    Comparing the effects of two proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation stretching techniques and static stretching on active knee extension range of motion and vertical jump performance

    Thumbnail

    View/Open

    VaillantN2018m-1a.pdf (1.808Mb)

    Date

    2018

    Author

    Vaillant, Nick

    Degree

    Master of Science

    Discipline

    Kinesiology

    Subject

    Proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation
    Stretching
    Range of motion
    Vertical jump
    Autogenic inhibition
    Reciprocal inhibition

    Metadata

    Show full item record

    Abstract

    Proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation (PNF) stretching has often been identified as an effective stretching technique for improving range of motion (ROM) prior to exercise. The two PNF stretching techniques that are most commonly performed are autogenic inhibition and reciprocal inhibition stretching. These techniques increase ROM by applying resistance to either agonist (i.e. autogenic) or antagonist (i.e. reciprocal) muscle groups to reduce reflex activity. Variability in PNF stretching procedures, however, cause difficulty comparing studies and translating findings to clinical practice. Limited research has also been performed on the effects of PNF stretching on athletic performance. The present study compared the effects of static, autogenic inhibition, and reciprocal inhibition stretching on knee extension ROM and vertical jump performance. Thirty healthy participants (16 male and 14 female) performed an Active Knee Extension test and a Vertical Jump test after 4 counter balanced stretching conditions. The stretching conditions consisted of no stretching (control), static stretching, autogenic inhibition stretching, and reciprocal inhibition stretching. A one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) with repeated measures and the Bonferonni post hoc test identified static stretching, autogenic inhibition stretching, and reciprocal inhibition stretching significantly increased knee extension ROM by means of 7.8, 8.1, and 9.4 degrees, respectively when compared to no stretching (p<.001). No significant differences were identified between the ROM increases associated with each technique (p>0.05). Pairwise comparisons also identified no significant differences in vertical jump height (cm) before or after the use of static, autogenic inhibition, or reciprocal inhibition stretching (p>0.05). The present study was the first to compare these stretching techniques using recommended pre-activity procedures. The results of this study identified all three stretching techniques as effective techniques for improving ROM prior to exercise without decreasing vertical jump performance.

    URI

    http://knowledgecommons.lakeheadu.ca/handle/2453/4316

    Collections

    • Electronic Theses and Dissertations from 2009

    Lakehead University Library
    Contact Us | Send Feedback

     


    Lakehead University Library
    Contact Us | Send Feedback