Joint Mobilization

1999 ◽  
Vol 4 (6) ◽  
pp. 59-60 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer A. Stone
Keyword(s):  
Joint Mobilization

scholarly journals Functional outcome of joint mobilization added to task-oriented training on hand function in chronic stroke patients

2020 ◽  
Vol 56 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Asmaa Sabbah ◽  
Sherine El Mously ◽  
Hanan Helmy Mohamed Elgendy ◽  
Mona Adel Abd Eltawab Farag ◽  
Abeer Abo Bakr Elwishy
Keyword(s):  
Functional Outcome ◽  
Hand Function ◽  
Chronic Stroke ◽  
Stroke Patients ◽  
Joint Mobilization ◽  
Task Oriented

Clinical observation of three-step modified shoulder joint mobilization for scapulohumeral periarthritis

2016 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 36-40
Author(s):  
Zhi-gang Lü ◽  
Jun Zhu ◽  
Wei-cheng Hu ◽  
Chun-rui Ning
Keyword(s):  
Shoulder Joint ◽  
Clinical Observation ◽  
Joint Mobilization

scholarly journals Biomechanical measures of knee joint mobilization

2011 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 162-171 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jason L Silvernail ◽  
Norman W Gill ◽  
Deydre S Teyhen ◽  
Stephen C Allison
Keyword(s):  
Knee Joint ◽  
Joint Mobilization

The initial effects of knee joint mobilization on osteoarthritic hyperalgesia

2007 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 109-118 ◽  
Author(s):  
Penny Moss ◽  
Kathleen Sluka ◽  
Anthony Wright
Keyword(s):  
Knee Joint ◽  
Joint Mobilization

scholarly journals Do experienced physiotherapists apply equal magnitude of force during a grade I central pa on the cervical spine?

2004 ◽  
Vol 60 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Conradie ◽  
E. Smit ◽  
M. Louw ◽  
M. Prinsloo ◽  
L. Loubser ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cervical Spine ◽  
Spinal Disorders ◽  
Joint Mobilization ◽  
Treatment Techniques ◽  
Average Maximum ◽  
Manual Examination ◽  
The Mean ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Posterior Anterior ◽  
Selection Of

Background and purpose: Physiotherapists frequently use central posterior-anterior (PA) joint mobilization techniques for assessing and managing spinal disorders. Manual examination findings provide the basis for the selection of treatment techniques. From the literature it is evident that the level of reliability varies when physiotherapists perform different mobilization techniques. Repeatability of mobilization techniques is important for better physiotherapy management. The aim of the study was to determine whether experienced physiotherapists apply equal magnitude of force during a grade I central PA mobilisation technique on the cervical spine. Another aim was to determine the variation in the magnitude of forceapplied by each individual physiotherapist. Subjects: Sample of convenience, consisting of sixteen (n=16) selected qualified physiotherapists with experience inOrthopaedic Manual Therapy.Methods: A grade I central PA was performed on the Flexiforce TM sensors positioned on C6 of the same asymptomatic model to measure the applied magnitude of force. Two separate measurements, each lasting 30-seconds, were obtained.Results: The average maximum peak force applied by the majority of physiotherapists (87.5%) was between 10.95gand 72g. The difference in the forces applied for the two measurements ranged between 0.64g and 24.4g. The BlandAltman scatterplot determined the mean of the difference between measurement one and two, calculated for the group, was zero. When comparing the two measurements, little variation was noted in the forces applied, as well as the coefficient of variation for each physiotherapist.Conclusion and Discussion: Current results demonstrated good intra-therapist and moderate to good inter-therapist repeatability. Further research is required to generalize results.

scholarly journals Effectiveness of Acromioclavicular Joint Mobilization and Physical Therapy vs Physical Therapy Alone in Patients with Frozen Shoulder: A Randomized Clinical Trial

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohammad Rahbar ◽  
Sepideh Ranjbar Kiyakalayeh ◽  
Bina Eftekharsadat ◽  
Behzad Izadseresht ◽  
Neda Dolatkhah
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Physical Therapy ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trial ◽  
Shoulder Pain ◽  
Acromioclavicular Joint ◽  
Frozen Shoulder ◽  
Secondary Outcome ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Joint Mobilization ◽  
Active Abduction

Abstract Background: Frozen shoulder (FS) is a prevalent musculoskeletal condition characterized by an often prolonged pain, disability and limited active and passive range of motion (ROM), however its management remains challenging yet. The objective of this trial was to compare the efficacy of acromioclavicular joint mobilization and physical therapy versus physical therapy in treatment of FS.Methods: In this single-blind randomized clinical trial, patients with diagnosis of FS were randomly allocated into mobilization + physical therapy (n=28) as experiment group, and physical therapy (n=28) as control group in two outpatient clinics of Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Iran. The primary outcomes were self-reported shoulder pain-related disability measured by the Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) questionnaire and goniometric assessment of shoulder ROM. The secondary outcome was the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). Measures were performed at the baseline, immediately and one month after beginning the treatments.Results: Totally 51 patients with 25.73 ± 6.88 years old of age completed the study and their data were analyzed. VAS, SPADI, pain and disability improved more significantly in experiment group compared to control group immediately [-4.63 (-5.58- -3.67) vs. -2.22 (-2.96- -1.47), p<0.001; -23.08 (-28.63- -17.53) vs. -13.04 (-17.93- -8.16), p=0.008; -26.00 (-31.71- -20.29) vs. -16.35 (-23.39- -9.31), p=0.034 and -21.25 (-29.11- -13.39) vs. -10.98 (-17.53- -4.43), p=0.042, respectively] and one month after beginning of treatment [-5.58 (-6.45- -4.72) vs. -3.61 (-4.60- -2.62), p<0.001; -33.43 (-40.85- -26.01) vs. -20.03 (-26.00- -14.07), p=0.001; --42.83 (-49.09- -36.57) vs. -25.57 (-33.92- -17.21), p<0.001 and -27.55 (-36.19- -15.94) vs. -16.58 (-24.48- -8.67), p=0.041, respectively]. Active abduction ROM was also improved more significantly immediately after treatment in experiment group compared to control group [25.83 (11.45- 40.13) vs. 10.17 (1.02- 19.15), p=0.025], however there were no significant differences between two groups concerning other measured ROMs immediately and one month after treatment (all p>0.05). Conclusions: Acromioclavicular mobilization along with conventional physical therapy was more efficient in decreasing pain and disability and improving active abduction ROM compared to physical therapy in patients with FS. These findings would suggest a new therapeutic method for shoulder disorders with pain and disability.Trial registrationwww.irct.ir, IRCT20100605004104N7, registered 06.01.2019 (https://www.irct.ir/trial/35900)

scholarly journals Manual Therapy Interventions for Adhesive Capsulitis: A Review

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 299-308
Author(s):  
Piumi Nakandala
Keyword(s):  
Manual Therapy ◽  
Adhesive Capsulitis ◽  
Frozen Shoulder ◽  
Inflammatory Reactions ◽  
Joint Mobilization ◽  
Functional Activities ◽  
Oral Medications ◽  
Manual Treatment ◽  
Therapy Interventions ◽  
Passive Movements

Adhesive Capsulitis is a debilitating condition which causes the capsule of the Gleno-humeral joint to get thickened and contracted progressively. The prevalence of the disease is much higher in the middle aged and elderly community. It is characterized by pain in the shoulder, and advance towards the restriction of the active and passive glenohumeral motions and thereby obstructing the overall functional activities of the daily living. The effectiveness of various non-operative methods in the treatment of Adhesive Capsulitis has been demonstrated in the literature. Corticosteroid injections and the oral medications are known to be alleviating the pain levels and the inflammatory reactions but not the mobility of the affected joint. Joint mobilization techniques, electrotherapeutic modalities and other manual treatment methods are also found to be effective. In summary, this review focuses on the pathophysiology of the adhesive capsulitis, stages of the condition progress and various manual therapy interventions. Keywords: Gleno-humeral joint, frozen shoulder, rehabilitation, active and passive movements, functional activities.

scholarly journals Effect of Temporomandibular Joint Mobilization on Neck Pain and Function in Patients with Chronic Non-Specific Neck Pain

2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (19) ◽  
Author(s):  
Edgaras Lapinskas ◽  
Janina Stirbytė
Keyword(s):  
Neck Pain ◽  
Temporomandibular Joint ◽  
Chronic Neck Pain ◽  
Flexor Muscle ◽  
Joint Mobilization ◽  
Movement Characteristics ◽  
Neck Function ◽  
Before And After ◽  
And Function

Background. Neck pain is a common problem, and it includes 30% of 25–29 year olds. The percentage of people over 45 years of age has risen to 50% (Knight and Draper, 2012). Long-term muscle imbalance disrupts body biomechanics. Due to long-lasting pain, the quality of work may decrease, rest can get worse, and mood may change. Purpose. To determine the effect of temporomandibular joint mobilization for neck pain and function in patients who suffer chronic non-specifc neck pain. Methods. The study involved six people with non-specifc chronic neck pain, who were divided into two groups: exercises, and the second group – exercises and mobilization of temporomandibular joint. At the beginning and end of the study, we performed the following tests: deep neck flexor endurance test, visual analogue scale (VAS), goniometry, the amplitude of the temporomandibular joint. Results. In the group of exercises, the pain score after treatment decreased (before – 67 ± 28, after – 14 ± 16.5) the strength and endurance of the deep neck flexor muscle improved (before – 13.7 ± 2.5 s, after – 28.7 ± 6.4 s). The amplitude of all neck movements was improved (p < 0.05), comparing them before and after physiotherapy. The amplitude of the temporomandibular joint improved the movement characteristics: depression, lateral excursions to left and right, protrusion (p < 0.05). Conclusions. Comparing the results after applying different methods of physiotherapy, intensity of pain and neck function parameters did not show significant differences.Keywords: temporomandibular joint, nonspecifc neck pain, mobilization.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document