COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS OF MUSCLE ENERGY TECHNIQUE AND STATIC STRETCHING ON HAMSTRING FLEXIBILITY, DYNAMIC BALANCE, AND PAIN IN YOUNG ADULTS WITH HAMSTRING TIGHTNESS: A RANDOMIZED COMPARATIVE STUDY

BackgroundHamstring tightness is one of the most frequently encountered musculoskeletal impairments amongyoung adults and is commonly associated with prolonged sitting, reduced physical activity, repetitivesporting activities, and poor postural habits. Reduced hamstring flexibility may alter lower-limbbiomechanics, restrict hip and knee motion, impair dynamic balance, and increase the risk ofmusculoskeletal injuries. Physiotherapists commonly use Muscle Energy Technique (MET) and staticstretching to restore muscle extensibility; however, evidence regarding their comparative effectivenessremains inconclusive. The present study was undertaken to compare the effectiveness of these twocommonly prescribed interventions in improving hamstring flexibility, dynamic balance, and painamong young adults with hamstring tightness.ObjectiveTo compare the effectiveness of Muscle Energy Technique and static stretching on hamstring flexibility,dynamic balance, and pain in young adults with hamstring tightness.MethodsA randomized comparative experimental study was conducted among young adults with clinicallyidentified hamstring tightness. Participants were allocated into either a Muscle Energy Technique groupor a static stretching group using random assignment. Both groups received supervised intervention threesessions per week for four weeks. Hamstring flexibility was assessed using the Active Knee ExtensionTest (AKET) and Sit-and-Reach Test (SRT), dynamic balance was evaluated using the Y-Balance Test(YBT), and pain intensity was measured using the Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS). Outcomemeasures were recorded before and after the intervention, and statistical analysis was performed tocompare within-group and between-group changes.ResultsBoth Muscle Energy Technique and static stretching resulted in significant improvements in hamstringflexibility, dynamic balance, and pain following four weeks of intervention. Improvements wereobserved in Active Knee Extension Test scores, Sit-and-Reach Test performance, Y-Balance Test scores,and Numeric Pain Rating Scale values in both groups. The Muscle Energy Technique groupdemonstrated greater improvements across the measured outcomes compared with the static stretchinggroup.ConclusionBoth interventions are effective in improving hamstring flexibility and functional performance in youngadults with hamstring tightness. However, Muscle Energy Technique demonstrated superior clinicaloutcomes compared with static stretching, suggesting that it may be considered the preferredconservative physiotherapy intervention for improving flexibility, balance, and pain in this population.