A common musculoskeletal concern: A comparative analysis of therapeutic techniques for hamstring shortness

Abstract

Background: Hamstring shortness is a common musculoskeletal issue among young adults. While several therapeutic approaches exist to address this condition, there is ongoing debate regarding the most effective treatment methods. Objective: This single-blind active controlled randomized study aimed to compare the immediate effects of muscle energy technique (MET) and percussive therapy (PT) on individuals with hamstring shortness. Methods: Thirty college students age between 18 and 25 years were randomly allocated to either the MET or PT group for the study. All participants were evaluated using two assessments: pre-intervention and immediate post-intervention. The Sit and Reach Test was the primary outcome measure, while hamstring strength, assessed with a MicroFET2®manual muscle tester, served as the secondary outcome. PT group received a 6-min massage-gun treatment, targeting each hamstring head for 2 min. MET group received anterior and posterior innominate techniques for 3 min each, totaling 6 min. Results: Both groups evidenced substantial enhancements in sit and reach scores and muscle strength following the intervention when compared to the baseline values (p < 0.05). There was no significant difference between groups in terms of hamstring flexibility and strength scores (p > 0.05). Conclusions: In conclusion, both MET and PT are effective interventions for improving hamstring flexibility and strength. MET\"s active mechanism may provide greater immediate benefits, while PT remains a valuable passive alternative. The choice between these techniques should be guided by individual patient needs and therapeutic objectives. Future research should focus on long-term outcomes, diverse populations, and combined strategies to enhance clinical applicability and patient outcomes.