Effects of muscle specific as compared to movement specific muscle energy technique in mechanical neck pain: A randomized controlled trial

被引:0
作者
Osama, Muhammad [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Fdn Univ Islamabad, Fdn Univ Coll Phys Therapy FUCP, Islamabad, Pakistan
[2] Brainstorm Res Brainstormres Org, Islamabad, Pakistan
关键词
Cervical spine; muscle energy technique; neck pain; pain; physical therapy; range of motion; CERVICAL RANGE; PHYSICAL-THERAPY; DISABILITY INDEX; MOTION; RELIABILITY; INHIBITION; PREVALENCE; POSTURE;
D O I
10.3233/BMR-210293
中图分类号
R826.8 [整形外科学]; R782.2 [口腔颌面部整形外科学]; R726.2 [小儿整形外科学]; R62 [整形外科学(修复外科学)];
学科分类号
摘要
BACKGROUND: Muscle energy technique (MET) is found to be effective for the management of neck pain and in addition to the muscle specific approach, clinicians may also adopt movement specific approach for METs. However, the literature is deficient in terms of comparison of muscle specific and movement specific METs in the management of mechanical neck pain. OBJECTIVE: To compare the effects of muscle specific and movement specific METs in the management of mechanical neck pain. METHODS: A single blind parallel design randomized controlled trial was conducted on 66 participants with mechanical neck pain ranging from 40-80 mm on visual analogue scale (VAS), aged between 19-44 years with pain and limitation on cervical motion. Once included, the participants were randomly allocated to two groups, namely the muscle specific MET group and the movement specific MET group. Outcome measures included VAS, Neck Disability Index (NDI) and cervical range of motion (ROM). RESULTS: No significant differences ( p > 0.05) were observed, neither immediately nor after 5 days, between muscle specific and movement specific MET in terms of VAS, NDI and ROM. However, a significant difference ( p < 0.05) was observed in both groups in terms of pre- and post-analysis for all outcome variables. CONCLUSIONS: Both muscle specific and movement specific METs are effective in the management of mechanical neck pain, with no significant differences between the two treatment techniques.
引用
收藏
页码:37 / 46
页数:10
相关论文
共 32 条
[1]  
Afridi S, 2022, Foundation University Journal of Rehabilitation Sciences, V2, P63, DOI 10.33897/fujrs.v2i2.272
[2]   Effects of active versus passive upper extremity neural mobilization combined with mechanical traction and joint mobilization in females with cervical radiculopathy: A randomized controlled trial [J].
Ayub, Afsah ;
Osama, Muhammad ;
Shakil-ur-Rehman ;
Ahmad, Shakeel .
JOURNAL OF BACK AND MUSCULOSKELETAL REHABILITATION, 2019, 32 (05) :725-730
[3]  
Bergman S, 2001, J RHEUMATOL, V28, P1369
[4]   Treatment preferences amongst physical therapists and chiropractors for the management of neck pain: Results of an international survey [J].
Carlesso L.C. ;
MacDermid J.C. ;
Gross A.R. ;
Walton D.M. ;
Santaguida P.L. .
Chiropractic & Manual Therapies, 22 (1)
[5]  
Chaitow L., 2006, Muscle energy techniques
[6]  
Darnell M W, 1983, J Craniomandibular Pract, V1, P49
[7]   The prevalence of neck pain in the world population: a systematic critical review of the literature [J].
Fejer, Rene ;
Kyvik, Kirsten Ohm ;
Hartvigsen, Jan .
EUROPEAN SPINE JOURNAL, 2006, 15 (06) :834-848
[8]   Short- and mid-term effects of adding upper cervical manual therapy to a conventional physical therapy program in patients with chronic mechanical neck pain. Randomized controlled clinical trial. [J].
Gonzalez-Rueda, Vanessa ;
Lopez-de-Celis, Carlos ;
Bueno-Gracia, Elena ;
Rodriguez-Sanz, Jacobo ;
Perez-Bellmunt, Albert ;
Barra-Lopez, Martin Eusebio ;
Hidalgo Garcia, Cesar .
CLINICAL REHABILITATION, 2021, 35 (03) :378-389
[9]  
Hammer WI., 2007, Functional soft-tissue examination and treatment by manual methods
[10]   Effects of oscillatory mobilization as compared to sustained stretch mobilization in the management of cervical radiculopathy: A randomized controlled trial [J].
Hassan, Furqan ;
Osama, Muhammad ;
Ghafoor, Abdul ;
Yaqoob, Muhammad Furqan .
JOURNAL OF BACK AND MUSCULOSKELETAL REHABILITATION, 2020, 33 (01) :153-158