Comparison of muscle energy techniques with and without routine physical therapy in mechanical neck pain

Autor: Muhammad Samiullah, Usama Ahmad Khan, Naveed Anwer
Jazyk: angličtina
Rok vydání: 2022
Předmět:
Zdroj: Journal Riphah College of Rehabilitation Sciences, Vol 10, Iss 01 (2022)
Druh dokumentu: article
ISSN: 2226-9215
2410-888X
Popis: Background Mechanical neck pain is common musculoskeletal condition, which needs medical care1 It is the 4th most leading cause of functional limitation among the world, which increases 30% every year. Most of the people may recover from the acute condition of neck pain without medical care due to bad posture. Further examination is required to diagnose that the pain is mechanical or neurogenic and out of the all types of neck, mechanical neck pain is the commonest of the all Objective The objective of the study was to compare the effects of MET when combined with routine physical therapy in contrast to routine physical therapy alone. Materials and methods It was a quasi-experimental study. A sample of 46 participants was selected through convenience sampling and was divided into two groups. Group A was treated with routine physical therapy (RPT) including hot pack and Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation (TENS) whereas group B was treated with Muscle energy technique (METs) combined with routine physical therapy. Data was collected before and after treatment. Total treatment duration was 2 weeks on alternate days (three days a week). Outcome measures were Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and Neck Disability Index (NDI) and data was analyzed using SPSS and Mann-Whitney test was used to compare the between group effectiveness. Results There was a significant difference between the VAS values of both groups (p< 0.05). Mean values of VAS for group A (RPT) before treatment were 8.53 and after treatment was 5.04 whereas pre and post-treatment values for group B (METs) were 8.01 and 1.40 respectively. The mean score of NDI of group A (RPT) before and after treatment was 22.07 and 18.15 respectively whereas pre and post-treatment values for group B (METs) were 24.93 and 12.85 respectively (p
Databáze: Directory of Open Access Journals
Externí odkaz: