ArticlesQuantitative analysis of the relative effectiveness of 3 iliotibial band stretches☆,☆☆,★,★★
Section snippets
Methods
Previous studies have been hindered by human measurement error.8 This study minimizes such errors by using a new approach developed at the Biomotion Laboratory at Stanford University, Stanford, CA, to evaluate stretch effectiveness.9 Each subject's biomechanics were captured as a 3-dimensional image by using a 4-camera gait acquisition systema with a forceplate. Change in ITB tissue length and the force generated within the stretched complex were measured for each stretch. The data was combined
Results
All 3 stretches created statistically significant changes in ITB length (P<.05), but stretch B was consistently most effective in both average ITB length change and in average adduction moments at the hip and knee (table 1).Empty Cell Stretches Measures A B C ITB length % increase 9.84 11.15 10.52 Hip adduction moment % (BW · H) 6.80 8.25 7.16 Knee adduction moment % (BW · H) 4.86 5.62 4.75 Statistical comparison A vs B B vs C A vs C ITB length % increase † * * Hip
Discussion
Myofascial trigger points, hip abductor muscle inhibition, and fascial adhesions can all contribute to increased tension on the ITB and friction at the ITB-epicondyle point of contact.7, 10, 11 A comprehensive stretching protocol is thus a component of a comprehensive treatment protocol to decrease ITB complex tension and restore functional tissue length. This study suggests that adding an overhead arm extension (stretch B) to the most common standing ITB stretch increases average ITB length
Conclusion
This study helps answers the question, Which is the best ITB stretch? By using advanced methods and apparatus at the Biomotion Laboratory, this study suggests that adding an overhead arm extension to the most common lateral ITB stretch increases average ITB length change and average external adduction moments in male elite-level distance runners, and that these differences are statistically significant. Additionally, the use of the methods and equipment used by the Biomotion Laboratory can now
References (12)
- et al.
Iliotibial band syndrome
Sports Med
(1992) - et al.
Iliotibial band syndrome in runners
Phys Sportsmed
(1984) - et al.
The anatomy of the iliopatellar band and the iliotibia tract
Am J Sports Med
(1986) The postural function of the iliotibial tract
Ann R Coll Surg Engl
(1979)- et al.
Biomechanics of iliotibial band friction syndrome in runners
Am J Sports Med
(1996) - et al.
MR findings in iliotibial band syndrome
Skeletal Radiol
(1997)
Cited by (52)
Conservative treatment of iliotibial band syndrome in runners: Are we targeting the right goals?
2022, Physical Therapy in SportSite dependent elastic property of human iliotibial band and the effect of hip and knee joint angle configuration
2020, Journal of BiomechanicsIliotibial Band Syndrome
2018, Essentials of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation: Musculoskeletal Disorders, Pain, and RehabilitationHip Injuries
2017, Clinical Orthopaedic Rehabilitation: A Team Approach, Fourth EditionIliotibial Band Syndrome in Runners. Biomechanical Implications and Exercise Interventions.
2016, Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Clinics of North America
- ☆
No commercial party having a direct financial interest in the results of the research supporting this article has or will confer a benefit upon the authors(s) or upon any organization with which the author(s) is/are associated.
- ☆☆
Reprint requests to Michael Fredericson, MD, Stanford University Medical Center, Division of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 300 Pasteur Dr, Edwards Bldg R107B, Stanford, CA 94305-5336, e-mail: [email protected].
- ★
Supplier
- ★★
a. MCU-240s; Qualisys, 2A Pasco Dr, E Windsor, CT 06088.