Official Journal Health Science of Prince of Songkla University

  • Home
  • Search
  • Current
  • Archives
  • Announcements
  • Guide for Authors
  • Publication Ethics
  • Editorial Board
  • Submit
  • About
  • Contact
  • Online-first Articles
  • EVENTS
  • Review Process
Home > Online-first > Gupta

Comparative Effectiveness of Active Release Technique versus Mulligan Bent Leg Raise Technique in Improving Hamstring Flexibility in Asymptomatic Healthy Subjects: A Randomised Controlled Trial

Megha Gupta, Richa Mahajan, Meena Makhija

Abstract

Objective: Hamstring flexibility is essential for maintaining optimal musculoskeletal function and preventing injuries. Manual therapy techniques such as Active Release Technique (ART) and Mulligan Bent Leg Raise (MBLR) have been explored to enhance flexibility, yet their comparative effectiveness remains unclear. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of ART, MBLR, and conventional hamstring stretching in improving hamstring flexibility among asymptomatic healthy subjects.
Material and Methods: Thirty-six asymptomatic healthy subjects were randomly assigned to three groups: Group 1 (n=12) received ART, Group 2 (n=12) received MBLR, and Group 3 (n=12) received conventional hamstring stretching. Interventions were administered six days in the 1st week. Hamstring flexibility was assessed using the Active Knee Extension (AKE) at three time points: baseline, at post 1 week, and at post 2 weeks. Data were analyzed using repeated measures ANOVA to evaluate the effects of time and group on AKE ROM, followed by Tukey-Kramer post-hoc tests for pairwise comparisons.
Results: Repeated measures ANOVA showed a significant main effect of time on AKE ROM (F(2,66)=24.78, p-value<0.001), with improvements from baseline to weeks 1 and 2 (p-value<0.001). No significant group effect (F(2,33)=0.80, p-value=0.458) or group × time interaction (F(4,66)=1.01, p-value=0.409) was found.
Conclusion: All three interventions—ART, MBLR, and conventional stretching—produced statistically significant improvements in hamstring flexibility, with no significant differences between groups. However, the changes did not exceed the minimal clinically detectable threshold, limiting any conclusions about functional relevance. Future trials with larger samples may offer clearer insights into their comparative effectiveness.

 Keywords

flexibility; healthy subjects; mulligan technique; range of motion; Tightness

 Full Text:

PDF

References

Waseem M, Nuhmani S, Ram CS, Ahmad F. A comparative study: Static stretching versus eccentric training on popliteal angle in normal healthy Indian collegiate males. Int J Sports Sci Eng 2009;3:180-6.

Worrell TW, Perrin DH. Hamstring muscle injury: the influence of strength, flexibility, warm-up, and fatigue. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 1992;16:12-8.

Webright WG, Randolph BJ, Perrin DH. Comparison of nonballistic active knee extension in neural slump position and static stretch techniques on hamstring flexibility. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 1997;26:7-13.

Koli BK, Anap DB. Prevalence and severity of hamstring tightness among college student: a cross sectional study. Int J Clin Biomed Res 2018:65-8.

Czaprowski D, Leszczewska J, Kolwicz A, Pawłowska P, Kędra A, Janusz P, et al. The comparison of the effects of three physiotherapy techniques on hamstring flexibility in children: a prospective, randomized, single-blind study. PLOS one 2013;8:e72026.

Medeiros DM, Cini A, Sbruzzi G, Lima CS. Influence of static stretching on hamstring flexibility in healthy young adults: systematic review and meta-analysis. Physiother Theory Pract 2016;32:438-45.

Iwata M, Yamamoto A, Matsuo S, Hatano G, Miyazaki M, Fukaya T, et al. Dynamic stretching has sustained effects on range of motion and passive stiffness of the hamstring muscles. J Sports Sci Med 2019;18:13.

Lad D, Patel P. Comparison of muscle energy technique and various stretching methods in assessing hamstring muscle flexibility in healthy individuals: a narrative review. Bharati Vidyapeeth Med J 2025;5:15-20.

Tai MZ, Bandawde M, Palekar T, Gondkar D. To compare effectiveness of mulligan bent leg raise versus myofacial release in physiotherapy students with hamstring tightness. Indian J Pharm Biol Res 2017;5:42-7.

Ul Abideen Z, Zahoor A, Amjad S, Akram R, Liaqat A, Ijaz Aet al. Effects of Active release technique versus mulligan bent leg raise on hamstring tightness in healthy individuals; a quasi-experimental study,the healer. J Physiother Rehabil Sci 2024;4:948-57.

Yadav H, Lehri A, Scholar P. Effect of proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation on flexibility in males with hamstring tightness. Int J Health Sci Res 2019;9:191-5.

Shinde SV, Kanase SB. Effect of mulligan bent leg raise versus neural mobilization on hamstring tightness in college students. IOSR J Dent Med Sci 2017;16:59-63.

Abelson B, Abelson K. Release your pain: resolving repetitive strain injuries with active release techniques. North Atlantic Books; 2005.

Kothawale S, Rao K. Effectiveness of positional release technique versus active release technique on hamstrings tightness. Int J Physiother Res 2018;6:2619-2.

George JW, Tunstall AC, Tepe RE, Skaggs CD. The effects of active release technique on hamstring flexibility: a pilot study. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 2006;29:224-7.

Kage V, Ratnam R. Immediate effect of active release technique versus mulligan bent leg raise in subjects with hamstring tightness: a randomized clinical trial. Int J Physiother Res 2014;2:301-4.

Hamid MS, Ali MR, Yusof A. Interrater and intrarater reliability of the active knee extension (AKE) test among healthy adults. J Phys Ther Sci 2013;25:957-61.

Kane Y, Bernasconi J. Analysis of a modified active knee extension test. J Orthop Spots Phys Ther 1992;15:141-6.

Wahid SA. Age Influence on knee joint flexors. Al-Kindy Coll Med J 2012;8:6-11.

Oh JS, Kang MH. The Effectiveness of hamstring stretching with proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation versus jack-knife stretching for individuals with hamstring tightness. J Musculoskelet Sci Technol 2021;5:14-20.

Chawla R, Raghani P, Shinde M, Chaudhari S. Immediate effect of suboccipital muscle inhibition technique versus mulligan bent leg raise technique on hamstring tightness in younger individuals: a comparative study. Int J Creat Res Thoughts 2021;9:f76-84.

Nagmode S, Borkar P. Effect of active release technique and static stretching on hamstring tightness in normal healthy individuals. Int J Sci Res 2020;4:92–9.

Kim MH, Kim YW, Jung DH, Yi CH. Reliability of measured popliteal angle by traditional and stabilized active-knee-extension test. Phys Ther Korea 2009;16:1-7.

Boora M, Sharma S. Study on effectiveness of static stretching and massage on hamstring flexibility in normal adults. IOSR J Sports Phys Educ 2016;3:01-5.

Olivencia O, Godinez GM, Dages J, Duda C, Kaplan K, Kolber MJ. The reliability and minimal detectable change of the ely and active knee extension tests. Int J Sports Phys Ther 2020;15:776.

Medeiros DM, Cini A, Sbruzzi G, Lima CS. Influence of static stretching on hamstring flexibility in healthy young adults: systematic review and meta-analysis. Physiother Theory Pract 2016;32:438-45.

Kubo K, Kanehisa H, Kawakami Y, Fukunaga T. Influence of static stretching on viscoelastic properties of human tendon structures in vivo. J Appl Physiol 2001;90:520-7.

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.31584/jhsmr.20261385

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

SUBMIT A PAPER

JHSMR accepts online submission through

AHR-iCON 2026

About The Authors

Megha Gupta
Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitaion, Indian Spinal Injuries Centre Multispeciality Hospital, Sector-C, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi 110070,
India

Richa Mahajan
Department of Physiotherapy, Amar Jyoti Institute of Physiotherapy, University of Delhi, Karkardooma, Vikas Marg, Delhi 110092,
India

Meena Makhija
Department of Physiotherapy, Indian Spinal Injuries Centre-Institute of Rehabilitation Sciences, Sector-C, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi 110070,
India

Article Tools
Abstract
Print this article
Indexing metadata
How to cite item
Email this article (Login required)
Email the author (Login required)

Journal Metrics

2023 (June)
Acceptance rate: 23.6%
2024 (June)
Acceptance rate: 19%
2025 (June)
Acceptance rate: 23%



Submission to final decision
74 days

Acceptance to publication
40 days

0.7
2025
CiteScore
 
32nd percentile
Q 3

Supported by

 

JHSMR now Indexed in








Image result for crossref





PSUMJ Homepage

Keywords COVID-19 SARS-CoV-2 Thailand Vietnam adolescent anxiety children computed tomography depression diabetes mellitus elderly knowledge mental health mortality older adults prevalence quality of life reliability risk factors treatment validity
Journal Content

Browse
  • By Issue
  • By Author
  • By Title
Font Size

Open Journal Systems