Comparison of instrument-assisted soft tissue mobilization and proprioceptive neuromuscular stretching on hamstring flexibility in patients with knee osteoarthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background The association between hamstring tightness and knee osteoarthritis (KOA) is significant because tight hamstrings can put more strain on the knee joint, reduce its range of motion, and cause compensatory movements that worsen the KOA. Objective To compare the effects of instrument-assisted soft tissue mobilization (IASTM) and proprioceptive neuromuscular (PNF) on hamstring flexibility in patients with KOA. Methods Data for the randomized controlled trial (NCT05110326) was collected from n = 60 participants randomly divided into group A received IASTM and group B received PNF stretching. In group A, the therapist made 30 strokes gentle strokes with the tool from the origin to the insertion while holding the plane at a 45-degree angle over the treatment area. In group B, PNF stretching was done with three repetitions and 10 seconds rest between each, after isometric contraction of the hamstring muscle using approximately 50% of their maximum strength, holding it for 8 seconds, and then releasing it. A 30-minute session was given to each patient three times per week and was given for 6 weeks. Outcome measures were the visual analog scale (VAS) for pain intensity, the active knee extension test (AKET) for hamstring flexibility, and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) for the health status of KOA patients. Results The study found a significant interaction (p < 0.001) between interventions and time across several measurements. After 6 weeks, both interventions resulted in significant improvements (p < 0.001) across all dependent variables, with group A (IASTM) showing more significant improvement in hamstring flexibility, pain reduction, and health status (p < 0.001) compared to group B (PNF). Conclusions Both the IASTM technique and PNF stretching resulted in increased hamstring flexibility, decreased pain, and enhanced general health. The IASTM technique, however, showed potential benefits over PNF stretching in terms of flexibility, pain relief, and public health enhancement. Physical therapists and manual therapists may prioritize the usage of the IASTM technique for patients who want to make significant changes in these areas.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".