Reliability and validity of sit-and-reach tests, systematic review

Abstract

The sit-and-reach tests are widely used for clinicians, coaches and sport scientist to estimate hamstring flexibility. Several sit-and-reach tests have been reported in the scientific literature, such as: a) classic sit-and-reach test, b) V sit-and-reach test, c) back-saver sit-and-reach test, d) modified sit-and-reach test and e) toe-touch test. There are some differences regarding the subject position (uni- or bilateral, sitting or standing, hip position) and the equipment used (measuring with or without a box, executed on the table or floor) among sit-and-reach tests. The choice of either test will be based on: a) the functionality of assessing methodology; b) the relative and absolute reliability (intra and inter tester); as well as c) the validity for estimating hamstring flexibility. This knowledge will allow clinicians, coaches and physical conditioning trainer to select an appropriate sit-and-reach test to categorize their athletes-patients (validity study) and to monitor the efficacy of the treatment performed (relative and absolute reliability study) for maintenance or improvement hamstring muscle flexibility. The main purposes of this systematic review are to analyze and compare the reliability and validity of sit and reach tests for estimating hamstring and low back flexibility.