The Effects of Doming of the Diaphragm in Subjects With Short-Hamstring Syndrome: A Randomized Controlled Trial

<jats:sec sec-type="context"><jats:title>Context:</jats:title><jats:p>Taking into account the complex structure of the diaphragm and its important role in the postural chain, the authors were prompted to check the effects of a diaphragm technique on hamstring flexibility.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec sec-type="objective"><jats:title>Objective:</jats:title><jats:p>To evaluate the effects of the doming-of-the-diaphragm (DD) technique on hamstrings flexibility and spine mobility.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec sec-type="design"><jats:title>Design:</jats:title><jats:p>Randomized placebo-controlled trial.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec sec-type="setting"><jats:title>Setting:</jats:title><jats:p>University laboratory.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec sec-type="patients"><jats:title>Patients:</jats:title><jats:p>Sixty young adults with short-hamstring syndrome were included in this randomized clinical trial using a between-groups design.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec sec-type="intervention"><jats:title>Intervention:</jats:title><jats:p>The sample was randomly allocated to a placebo group (n = 30) or an intervention group (n = 30). Duration, position, and therapist were the same for both treatments.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec sec-type="main outcome measures"><jats:title>Main Outcome Measures:</jats:title><jats:p>Hamstring flexibility was assessed using the forward-flexion-distance (FFD) and popliteal-angle test (PAT). Spinal motion was evaluated using the modified Schober test and cervical range of movement.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec sec-type="results"><jats:title>Results:</jats:title><jats:p>Twoway ANOVA afforded pre- to postintervention statistically significant differences (<jats:italic>P</jats:italic> < .001) in the intervention group compared with the placebo group for hamstring flexibility measured by the FFD (mean change 4.59 ± 5.66 intervention group vs 0.71 ± 2.41 placebo group) and the PAT (mean change intervention group 6.81 ± 8.52 vs placebo group 0.57 ± 4.41). Significant differences (<jats:italic>P</jats:italic> < .05) were also found in the modified Schober test (mean change intervention group –1.34 ± 3.95 vs placebo group 1.02 ± 3.05) and cervical range of movement. Significant between-groups differences (<jats:italic>P</jats:italic> < .05) were also found in all the variables measured.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec sec-type="conclusions"><jats:title>Conclusions:</jats:title><jats:p>The DD technique provides sustained improvement in hamstring flexibility and spine mobility.</jats:p></jats:sec>