NCT06748560

Effects of Neurodynamic Sliding Versus Eccentric Training on Lower Extremity Function, Strength and Proprioception in Athletes with Short Hamstring Syndrome.

Completed NA Last updated 27 December 2024

What this trial tests

NA trial testing Neurodynamics in Hamstring Tightness in 54 participants. Completed in 1 October 2024.

Timeline

4 August 2023

Primary endpoint
1 December 2023

1 October 2024

Quick facts

Lead sponsor	Yeditepe University
Phase	NA
Status	Completed
Study type	INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation	randomized
Design	parallel
Masking	none
Primary purpose	treatment
Enrollment	54
Start date	4 August 2023
Primary completion	1 December 2023
Estimated completion	1 October 2024
Sites	1 location across Turkey (Türkiye)

Drugs / interventions tested

• Neurodynamics
• Eccentric training

Conditions studied

• Hamstring Tightness — all drugs for Hamstring Tightness →
• Hamstring Injury Prevention — all drugs for Hamstring Injury Prevention →

Sponsor

Yeditepe University

Who can join

Adults 18 to 30, male only, with Hamstring Tightness or Hamstring Injury Prevention. Patients with the condition only — healthy volunteers not accepted.

Sponsor's own description

Hamstring strains are among the most common injuries in field sports, accounting for 10% of all team sports injuries and often leading to long-term absence from activities. Risk factors include older age, previous injuries, reduced flexibility, and strength deficits. The hamstrings play a critical role in dynamic stability and joint preservation, particularly for the hip and knee. While stretching is crucial for injury prevention, there is debate over optimal techniques.

The neurodynamic sliding technique (NST) and eccentric training (ET) are two methods that can improve flexibility and reduce injury risk. This study uniquely combines ET with NST to address hamstring tightness in athletes, aiming to evaluate their effects individually and in combination on knee muscle strength, range of motion, proprioception, and lower limb function compared to a control group.

The hypotheses examine whether these interventions differ in their impact on eccentric and concentric knee strength, the knee flexor/extensor strength ratio, range of motion, proprioception, and dynamic balance (measured via the Y Balance Test). The null hypothesis (H0) proposes no differences, while the alternative hypothesis (H1) suggests significant differences among the intervention methods.

Publications & conference data

No peer-reviewed publications indexed yet for this trial. Completed trials usually publish results within 12-18 months.