Objective: To assess the effect of immobilization versus early range of motion exercises in treating primary arthroscopic rotator cuff repair secondary to full-thickness tear. Design: Parallel group randomized clinical trial. Participants: 30 patients with primary arthroscopic rotator cuff repair secondary to full-thickness tear participated in the study. Interventions: Patients were divided into two groups, 15 in each group. The first group (A) received early range of motion (ROM) exercises started 2 weeks post-operative; and the second group (B) immobilized immediately post operative and received delayed range of motion exercises started 6 weeks post-operative. Main outcomes: Shoulder pain and function were assessed by shoulder pain and disability index (SPADI). ROM of shoulder flexion, abduction, and internal rotation were assessed by standard goniometer. Scapular protraction was assessed by digital caliper and scapular upward rotation was assessed by bubble inclinometer. All outcomes were assessed in both groups 6 weeks, 3 months and 6 months postoperative. Results: A significant increase in flexion, abduction and internal rotation ROM at 6 weeks, 3 months and 6 months was observed between groups in favor of Group A.
Background: Partial foot amputation (PFA) is defined as a surgical loss of part of either the forefoot or mid-foot. It is usually secondary to physiological foot dysfunctions such as peripheral neuropathy (PN). The effect of amputation on spatiotemporal characteristics of gait in patients with PFA secondary to PN is still not well established yet Purpose: The aim of the study was to evaluate the effect of PFA on characteristics of gait in patients with PFA secondary to PN compared to PN patients without amputation. Methods: Cadence, stance, swing, double limb support, stride time, step length, and stride length were assessed for 53 participants divided into two groups; (A) PFA group: 25 subjects with healed unilateral PFA and (B) PN Groups: 28 subjects with PN with neither ulcer nor amputation. The gait analysis was conducted at a self-selected speed using the STT three-dimensional motion analysis system. Results: The MANOVA main effect revealed no significant difference between the two groups (p = 0.102). The post hoc test revealed no significant difference between the two groups in all spatiotemporal variables (p > 0.05). Conclusion: Both groups walked at a slow cadence, taking short steps with increased percentage of stance and double limb support.
Objective: To compare the effectiveness of the slider, tensioner neurodynamic mobilization techniques and stretching exercises on pain, range of motion (ROM), and functional disability in patients with chronic discogenic sciatica. Design: A pre-test post-test multi arm parallel RCT. Setting: Outpatient clinics, faculty of physical therapy, Kafrelsheikh University. Participants: Thirty-six patients with unilateral chronic discogenic sciatica were randomly allocated into three equal groups: Group (A) slider neurodynamic mobilization, Group (B) tensioner neurodynamic mobilization, and Group (C) stretching exercises of back extensors, hamstrings, and gastrocnemius muscles. Treatment was given three sessions per week for two weeks. Outcome measures: All patients were examined by visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain intensity, Modified-Modified Schober test (MMST) for lumbar flexion ROM, goniometer for hip flexion and knee extension ROM, and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) for functional assessment. Results: There were no statistically significant differences between groups at baseline ([Formula: see text] 0.05). There were statistically significant differences in the slider and tensioner groups compared to the stretching group for all variables. Furthermore, statistically significant differences were found in the slider technique as compared to the tensioner technique regarding ROM of lumbar flexion ([Formula: see text] = 0.03), hip flexion ([Formula: see text] = 0.004), and knee extension ([Formula: see text] = 0.005). Conclusion: Slider and tensioner neurodynamic mobilization techniques are more effective than stretching exercises in terms of reducing pain, increasing ROM, and improving function. Slider technique is more effective in ROM improvement.
Background: Sciatica is a critical musculoskeletal disorder affecting many people and its related disabilities disturb their lives. Methods: The study purpose was to see which one of two neurodynamic techniques and stretching exercises has a better effect on improving symptoms and dysfunction for cases of sciatica due to disc herniation. There were 36 unilaterally affected participants. They were assigned at random into three groups; participants in the first were treated by the slider technique, while participants in the second were treated by the tensioner technique, and participants in the third were treated by stretching. The treatment program was set to be 6 successive sessions in 2 weeks. The therapist assessed the participants pre and post-program.Results: The statistical analysis revealed that there were significant differences in favor of the slider and tensioner techniques compared with stretching. Furthermore, there were found significant differences in favor of the slider as compared to the tensioner technique regarding range of motion (ROM).Conclusion: Slider and tensioner techniques have better clinical results than stretching exercises in improving symptoms and dysfunction with a greater effect for the slider technique in enhancing ROM.Trial registration: This study was executed under the ethical guidelines of 1964 declaration of Helsinki and was registered in the clinical trial registry with clinical trial.gov on 10/02/2021, ID: NCT04746690.
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.