Iliotibial band syndrome rehabilitation in female runners: a pilot randomized study

Abstract

Background: Iliotibial band syndrome (ITBS) carries marked morbidity in runners. Its management is not standardized and lacks evidence base. We evaluated the effectiveness of three different exercises programs in reducing ITBS symptoms. Methods: Patients were divided into three equal treatment groups: ITB stretching (group A), conventional exercise (group B), and experimental hip strengthening exercise (group C). Numeric pain rating scale (NPRS; every week), lower extremity functional scale (LEFS; every 2 weeks), dynamometer (DN; weeks 0, 2, 4, 6, 8), single-limb mini squat (SLMS; week 0, 8), and Y-balance test™ (YBT), between and within group's differences were evaluated using ANOVA model. Results: Twenty-four female runners (age 19-45 years) were included into one of three groups (A, B, and C). Statistical significance (p < 0.05) within group C was observed for composite YBT and DN for injured and noninjured leg, the YBT (injured leg for the posterior medial), LEFS, NPRS, and the SLMS. Statistical significance (p < 0.05) was found between group A and group C. The stretching group exhibited statistically significant (p < 0.05) YBT anterior reach for the injured/non-injured leg and the LEFS. Conclusion: There were no statistical differences between the three groups. The subjects who underwent experimental hip strengthening exercises consistently showed improvements in outcome measures, and never scored less than the other two groups.

Conservative Rehabilitation Treatments of Iliotibial Band Syndrome: A Systematic Review

“…Authors found no statistical differences between the three groups. The subjects who underwent experimental hip strengthening exercises consistently showed improvements in outcome measures, and never scored less than the other two groups (31).…”

“…From the summary of the studies, several treatment modalities used for this pathology have been found, many of which have demonstrated good results for reducing pain and encouraging a return to sports. In particular, the most used treatments were: muscle strengthening of the hip abductor, either as the main intervention (29)(30)(31) or as an integral part of the rehabilitation programme (7,(32)(33)(34), and manual therapy techniques (7,(35)(36)(37). Other types of treatments were: use of shockwave physical therapy (7), correction of running biomechanics through targeted programs (33,38), correction of malfunctioning muscle and joint downstream and upstream of the knee with a multifaceted approach There was a significant decrease in pain scores and in pain during running in both groups, but no significant difference was observed between the 2 groups.…”

“…Another limitation is the presence of numerous case reports and case series, which, although providing important information for the purposes of rehabilitation treatment, do not represent significant and relevant studies. Moreover, papers for a quite common syndrome are few to give frank conclusions even because the treatment are different and variable and some studies published after search strategy have not been considered (31,43,44). Finally, a division between proximal and distal cases was not made, future studies could consider this distinction.…”

Plank Times and Lower Extremity Overuse Injury in Collegiate Track-and-Field and Cross Country Athletes

“…Considering that plank exercises require no special equipment, are safe, and programs including them are effective at improving hip- and trunk-strength measures [ 21 ], they are often included in rehabilitation programs for injured runners [ 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 ]. However, whether improved plank times are associated with reduced injury risk in cross country and track-and-field runners is not clear.…”

“…Trunk muscle endurance exercises, including front and side planks, are often included in rehabilitation programs for common running injuries [ 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 ], as well as in programs developed to prevent running-related injuries [ 19 , 20 ] or improve performance [ 21 ]. However, the current evidence on their validity as a screening tool for injury risk is inconsistent.…”