Background Non-specific neck pain is the most prevailing musculoskeletal disorder which has a large socioeconomic burden worldwide. It is associated with poor posture and neck strain which may lead to pain and restricted mobility. Physical therapists treat such patients through several means. Post isometric relaxation and Myofascial release therapy are used in clinical practice with little evidence to be firmed appropriately. So, this study was conducted to explore the effect of Post-isometric relaxation in comparison to Myofascial release therapy for patients having non-specific neck pain. Methodology Sixty patients were randomly allocated to Post isometric group and the Myofascial group. The treatment period was of 2 weeks. All the patients were evaluated using the Visual analogue scale (VAS), Neck disability index (NDI), Universal Goniometer, and WHO BREF Quality of life-100 in the 1st and 6th sessions. Recorded data was entered on SPSS 21. Data were examined using two-way repeated ANOVA to measure the variance of analysis (group x time). Results Analysis of the baseline characteristics revealed that both groups were homogenous in terms of age and gender i.e. a total of 60 participants were included in this research study 30 in each group. Out of 60 patients, there were 20(33.3%) males and 40(66.7%) females with a mean age of 32.4(5.0) years. Participants in the Post Isometric group demonstrated significant improvements (p < 0.025) in VAS, NDI, Cervical Extension, left side rotation ranges, and QoL (Social Domain) at the 2-week follow-up compared with those in the Myofascial group. In addition, the Myofascial group indicated significantly better improvement in the mean score of CROM (flexion and right and left side bending). Conclusion The study demonstrated patients with nonspecific neck pain can benefit from the post isometric relaxation with significant improvement in pain, disability, cervical ROM, and Quality of life compared with myofascial release therapy. Trial registration Clinical Trial registered on clinicaltrial.gov (NCT number) NCT04638062, 20/11/2020 (prospectively registered).
Background & Objective:Low back pain (LBP) is the foremost cause to hamper an individual’s functional activities in Pakistan. Its impact on the quality of life and work routine makes it a major reason for therapeutic consultations. About 90% of the cases with LBP are non-specific. Various options are available for the treatment of LBP. Posterior-anterior vertebral mobilization, a manual therapy technique; and thermotherapy are used in clinical practice, however evidence to gauge their relative efficacy is yet to be synthesised. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of posterior-anterior vertebral mobilization versus thermotherapy in the management of non-specific low back pain along with general stretching exercises.Methods:A randomised controlled trial with two-group pretest-posttest design was conducted at IPM&R, Dow University of Health Sciences (DUHS). A total of 60 Non-specific low back pain (NSLBP) patients with ages from 18 to 35 years were inducted through non-probability and purposive sampling technique. Baseline screening was done using an assessment form (Appendix-I). Subjects were allocated into two groups through systematic random sampling. Group-A (experimental group) received posterior-anterior vertebral mobilization with general stretching exercises while group B (control group) received thermotherapy with general stretching exercises. Pain and functional disability were assessed using NPRS and RMDQ respectively. Pre & post treatment scores were documented. A maximum drop-out rate of 20% was assumed. Recorded data were entered into SPSS V-19. Frequency and percentages were calculated for categorical variables. Intragroup and intergroup analyses were done using Wilcoxon signed ranked test and Mann-Whitney Test respectively. A P-value of 0.05 was considered statistically significant.Results:Pre and post treatment analysis revealed that P-values for both pain and disability were less than 0.05, suggesting significant difference in NPRS and RMDQ scores. Whereas, median scores for both pain and disability were decreased by 75% in experimental group and 50% in control group. For inter group analysis p-values for both pain and disability were found to be less than 0.05.Conclusion:Both physiotherapeutic interventions, the PAVMs and thermotherapy, have significant effects on NSLBP in terms of relieving pain and improving functional disability. However PAVMs appeared to be more effective than thermotherapy.
Background: Now, a days myofascial trigger points are tremendously occurring and become a stressful part of nearly any person at any time in a lifetime. This study compares the effects of ischemic compression pressure with spray and stretch technique to treat active myofascial trigger points of the trapezius muscle in patients with neck pain. Methodology: A comparative interventional study was conducted at Dow University of Health Sciences from December 2016 and May 2017. Seventy patients (35 in each group) with active myofascial trigger points of trapezius were randomly assigned to group A (ischemic compression pressure) and group B (vapocoolant spray and stretch technique). Baseline and last session assessment of pain intensity, pain pressure tolerance, cervical range of motion and functional disability were measured through numerical pain-rating scale, algometer, goniometer and neck disability index, respectively. Results: Both groups showed significant improvement in all dependent variables of study which were neck pain, cervical range of motion and pain pressure tolerance (p-value<0.05). Group A showed greater improvement in pain intensity (p-value 0.015), pressure pain threshold (p-value 0.000) and cervical range of motion flexion, left side flexion and right-side flexion (p-value 0.002, 0.000 & 0.004) than group B. Conclusion: Both ischemic compression pressure & spray and stretch technique deactivated trigger points of upper fibers trapezius muscle in patients with neck pain, but the ischemic compression pressure was superior to the spray and stretch technique.
Background Neck pain is a common musculoskeletal issue that has been seen as high in terms of disability. Muscle Energy Techniques (MET) are advanced soft tissue techniques to treat Mechanical Neck Pain (MNP). This study compares the Autogenic inhibition (AI) technique with the Reciprocal Inhibition (RI) technique providing conventional treatment to improve functional outcomes. Methods A randomized control trial was conducted at Sindh Institute of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation, Karachi, Pakistan from August 28, 2021, to December 31, 2021 among 20–50 years old patients with Moderate intensity MNP for more than 4 weeks and with limited Neck ROMs. The sample were divided randomly and allocated into two groups (groups 1 and 2). Group 1 and 2 received 12 sessions of AI and RI with Conventional therapy respectively. The randomization sheet was generated online from randomization.com for a sample size of 80 and two groups of study ‘AI’ and ‘RI’ with a ratio of 1:1 by an independent statistician. Pain (primary outcome), range of motion, and functional disability (secondary outcomes) were assessed through visual analog scale (VAS), Goniometer, and Neck disability index (NDI) at baseline, 1st, and last session respectively. Mean and standard deviation, frequency, and percentages were calculated. Chi-square test and independent t-test compare baseline characteristics. The Repeated Measure Two-Way ANOVA compared mean VAS, NDI, and ROM. The significant P-value was less than 0.05. Results The mean duration of neck pain was 8 weeks. There was a more significant (p < 0.001) improvement in pain (ES = 0.975), disability (ES = 0.887), neck ROMs; flexion (ES = 0.975), extension (ES = 0.965), right and left lateral flexion (ES = 0.949 and 0.951), and right and left rotation (ES = 0.966 and 0.975) in the AI group than the RI group at 12th session. Conclusion The Autogenic Inhibition-MET is more beneficial than Reciprocal Inhibition-MET in improving Pain, Range of Motion, and Functional Disability in patients with Sub-Acute and Chronic Mechanical Neck Pain. Therefore, it is a beneficial technique to add with conventional neck pain therapy to get better treatment outcomes in MNP patients. Trial Registration Prospectively registered on ClincalTrials.Gov with ID: NCT05044078.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.