Investigation the effect of Graston Technique on strength and postural stabilization in individuals with asymptomatic dynamic knee valgus P. Pis ¸irici a , B.U. S ¸ akul b a Bahçes ¸ehir University, Health Sciences Faculty Physiotherapy and Rehabilitation Department, Istanbul, Turkey b Medipol University, School of Medicine- Anatomy Department, ˙ Istanbul, Turkey 1. Introduction Dynamic knee valgus (DDV) is a biomechanical deviation occurring in 3 movement plans and involving contralateral pelvis fall simulta- neously with the internal rotation and adduction of the femur [1]. For activities on one leg, hip abductors prevent pelvic fall and hip adduction [2]. Especially gluteus medius (GMed) muscle strength is found to have a strong relationship with DDV and postural stabilization (PS) [3–5]. Instrument-asisted soft tissue mobilization (IASTM) technique has been reported to increase force prodution and performance [6–8]. In our study, the effect of IASTM with Graston Technique® instruments on eccentric strength and PS was examined without giving strengthening exercises. 1.1. Research Question Does IASTM treatment applied to hip abductors increase strength and PS? 2. Methods Study is designed as a randomized controlled trial. 44 recreationally active women who has 10 ◦ and more FPPA increase in the single leg squat (SLS) test [10] were included in the study and were randomisated into two groups. Graston Group (GG) (n = 22) and control group (CG) (n = 22). FPPA was measured with the Spark Motion 2D motion analysis system.Unipedal static (SPS) and dynamic (DPS) postural stabilization was evaluated with Biodex Stability System, the eccentric peak torque was evaluated with Cybex isokinetic system. A total of 12 sessions of GT® treatments were applied to participants in the GG, 5 minutes, twice a week for 6 weeks. No application has been made to CG. Evaluations completed at the beginning and end of the treatment. At the end of the study, all participants were included in the appropriate exercise program. 3. Results The average age of the participants is 21.39 ± 1.79 years, body mass index is 20.09 ± 2.45 kg/m2. Groups Test value Control Graston p Before Treatment Min-Max (Median) 20-85 (54) 26-70 (50) t :0,365 Peak torque (N. m) Average ±Ss 51,27±15,32 49,68±13,50 a 0,717 After Treatment Min-Max (Median) 26-85 (49) 30-85 (59) t:2,625 Peak torque (N. m) Average ±Ss 49,91±13,11 60,41±13,42 a 0,012* Difference -1,36±13,68 10,73±10,62 Test Value t:-0,468 t:4,740 t:-3,276 p b 0,654 b 0,001** a 0,002** Before Treatment Min-Maks (Median) 0,9-1,9 (1,3) 0,8-1,7 (1,25) t:0,962 SPS Average ±Ss 1,35±0,25 1,27±0,28 a 0,341 After Treatment Min-Max (Median) 0,5-1,6 (1,35) 0,8-1,6 (0,9) Z:-3,037 SPS Average ±Ss 1,2±0,31 0,97±0,18 c 0,002** Difference -0,15±0,23 -0,30±0,27 Test Value Z:-2,506 Z:-3,322 Z:-2,096 p d 0,012* d 0,001** c 0,036* Before Treatment Min-Maks (Median) 1-3,43 (1,4) 0,5-1,8 (1,5) Z:-0,639 DPS Ort ±Ss 1,52±0,53 1,43±0,27 0,523 After Treatment Min-Max (Median) 0,8-1,6 (1,15) 0,2-1,5 (0,8) t:4,566 DPS Average ±Ss 1,19±0,27 0,8±0,29 0,001** Difference -0,33±0,46 -0,62±0,28 Test Value Z:-3,314 Z:4,028 Z:-3,567 p d 0,001** d 0,001** c 0,001** a Student-t Test bPaired samples test cMann Witness U test d Wil- coxon Signed Ranks Test *p<0,05 **p<0,01 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Gait & Posture journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/gaitpost https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2020.08.035 0966-6362/© 2020 Published by Elsevier Ltd. Gait & Posture 81 (2020) 279–280