Background: Dual tasks fall into two main groups: motor dual tasks, which require performance of a motor task and a postural control task at the same time; and cognition dual task that require performance of a cognition task and postural control task at the same time. Aim: To focus on comparative effects of motor and cognitive dual-task gait training on balance and mobility in persons with intellectual disabilities Methodology: A randomized clinical trial was conducted on 52 subjects (n=26) in a District Headquarter Hospital, Mirpur AJK. Fifty-two patients were randomly allocated in two groups as Group A received motor dual task and Group B received cognitive dual task training. Total duration of study was three weeks and assessment done before treatment and after every week. Rancho Los Amigos Cognitive Functional Scale (RLACF), Berg Balance Scale (BBS), Walking While Talking Test (WWT) and Stair Climb Test (SCT) for the assessment of the patient’s improvement in skills, balance and mobility. Results: The results of the study concluded that Rancho Los Amigos Cognitive Function Scale, Berg Balance Scale, Walking While Talking Test and Stair Climb Test scores were improved in both groups significantly. But on comparison; Cognitive dual task training significantly produce better results in improving the balance and mobility in the person with intellectual disability as compared to Motor dual task training with p value<0.005. Conclusion: The study concluded that Cognitive dual task training is statistically and clinically more significant in improving the balance and mobility in the intellectual disable persons as compared to Motor dual task training. Key words: Cognitive dual task, Intellectual disabilities, Motor and cognitive dual-task gait training.
Background: Low back pain is a common musculoskeletal problem of the modern society as 70-80% people of any age and gender get affected by this in their lifetime which affect their normal activities of daily living. Aim: To compare the efficacy between Mulligan SNAGs and McKenzie exercises in improving pain level, range of motions and functional status in chronic mechanic al low back pain patients. Method: A randomized control trial study was conducted on 45 patients suffering from chronic mechanical low back pain at Physiotherapy Department of Mayo Hospital Lahore from16th December to 21th January 2021.The patients were randomly allocated in three group’s i.e; Conventional and two trial groups by computerized generated list. In Conventional group; 15 patients were treated with conventional therapy. In trial groups; one was treated with Mulligan SNAGs and Conventional therapyand the other trial group were treated with McKenzie exercises and Conventional therapy 3 sessions per week. Pain measured by Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS), Lumbar spine's ranges measured by Goniometer and functional status measured by Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) at the completion of the 4 weeks treatment session. Results: NPRS scoring and Ranges showed significant improvement in all groups but NPRS significantly improved in McKenzie exercises group and significant improvement in ROM showed in Mulligan SNAGs group in all movements but there was no significant difference found between three groups comparison in improving the functional status with p-value =0.243. Practical implication: The study provides the opportunity to the patients to consider physiotherapy as an effective treatment for the mechanical low back pain. It also provides the statistical knowledge about these physiotherapy techniques and their effectiveness in treating the low back pain. Conclusion: Both the Mulligan SNAGs and McKenzie exercises are effective in treatment of Chronic lumbar pain as pain is most reduced through McKenzie exercise (3.33±1.29, p<0.000) while ranges of spine is improved through Mulligan SNAGs mobilization in all directions. Keywords: Chronic Mechanical Low back pain, Mulligan SNAGs mobilization, McKenzie exercises
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.