Comparison of effectiveness of muscle energy technique with Mulligan mobilization in patients with non-specific neck pain

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-10
Author(s):  
Anam Manzoor ◽  
Naveed Anwar ◽  
Kehkshan khalid ◽  
Rizwan Haider ◽  
Mehwish Saghir ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Neck Pain ◽  
Pain Intensity ◽  
Functional Status ◽  
Group Analysis ◽  
Neck Disability Index ◽  
Muscle Energy Technique ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Muscle Energy ◽  
Neck Disability ◽  
Group 1

Abstract Background: Neck pain is very common in general population. The onset of pain may be sudden or insidious, recurrent or persistent in nature. The prevalence of neck pain in Pakistan is not known. The neck pain that persists for more than 3 months is called chronic neck pain. There are different physiotherapy techniques to manage nonspecific neck pain including Mulligan mobilization and muscle energy technique. Objective: to compare the efficacy of muscle energy technique with Mulligan mobilization in patients having non-specific neck pain. Methodology: This quasi-experimental study was conducted at Mayo hospital physiotherapy department, Lahore. The study duration was six months from March 2017 to September 2017. Sample size calculated was 56 by using g power software. Random sampling technique was used. Subjects were divided into two groups. In the group 1 patients; muscle energy technique was used and in group 2; Mulligan mobilization as natural apophyseal glides (NAGs) and sustained natural apophyseal glides (SNAGs) were used. The pain intensity, functional status of neck and cervical range of motion (ROM) were measured before and after treatment session by using visual analogue (VAS), neck disability index (NDI) and goniometer. Independent t-test was applied for between group analysis. Results: The mean age of participants is 36.89±9.28. The mean improvement in pain intensity was 3.61 for the Muscle energy technique group and for Mulligan group it was 4.86 after three weeks’ treatment. The functional status score according to neck disability index (NDI) pre-treatment mean for the group 1 was 12.04±4.69 and Continuous....

scholarly journals Comparison of Sustained Natural Apophyseal Glides and Maitland Manual Therapy in Non-Specific Neck Pain on Numeric Pain Rating Scale and Neck Disability Index

2018 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. 457-462
Author(s):  
Fahad Tanveer ◽  
Adnan Afzal ◽  
Muhammad Adeel ◽  
Sana Shahid ◽  
Maham Masood
Keyword(s):  
Neck Pain ◽  
Functional Status ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Neck Disability Index ◽  
Numeric Pain Rating Scale ◽  
Group 3 ◽  
Group 2 ◽  
Neck Disability ◽  
Pain Rating Scale ◽  
Group 1

Incidence of neck pain is increasing day by day due to changed, sedentary, non-ergonomic environment and life style. This becomes the reason of an increased load of human resource and cost. To shed this load of resources and cost, it’s essential to sort out means which give real relief to this increasinglysignificant problem. To compare outcomes of sustained natural apophyseal glides (SNAGs) versus Maitland manual therapy in improving non-specific neck pain. It was a quasi-experimental study design. The study was conducted in Chaudhary Muhammad Akram, Teaching & Research Hospital, Lahore and SuriyaAzeem Teaching Hospital, Lahore within six months from June 2015 to December 2015. A total of 75 subjects with non-specific neck pain using non-probability convenience sampling technique who fulfilled the specific inclusion and exclusion criteria were randomly allocated to three groups; group 1 received SNAGs,group 2 Maitland mobilization and group 3 conventional treatment. Baseline, post-intervention and follow up readings were taken through numeric pain rating scale (NPRS) for pain intensity, neck disability index (NDI) for functional status,goniometer for range of motion and manual muscle testing for muscle strengthof neck. The subject in each group were given twelve sessions, with three sessions a week. Data were analyzed through statistical package of social sciences (SPSS) 21. The results of each group showed pre-treatment pain intensity for group 1 was 7.04+1.338 that changed to 3.52+0.714 and for group 2 it was changed from 7.52+0.872 to 5.16+0.850 and 7.16+0.943 to 5.12+0.781 for group 3. The NDI score for group 1, 2 and 3 were 31.56+5.560, 25.040+7.086 and 25.560+5.477 that were changed to 13.120+2.759, 16.360+2.899 and 12.600+2.020 respectively. The one way ANOVA test compared mean of three groups and p-value for painintensity after treatment was p=0.000 and for functional status p=0.000. The study showed that SNAGs mobilization was more effective in the management of non-specific neck pain and also conventional treatment improved functional status of neck than Maitland mobilization.

scholarly journals Effectiveness of Muscle Energy Technique with and without Strain Counter Strain Technique in Individuals with Non-Specific Neck Pain - A Pilot Study from Aurangabad, India

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (31) ◽  
pp. 2470-2475
Author(s):  
Karishma Anurag Kapur ◽  
Sunil Gopal Rao Harsulkar
Keyword(s):  
Neck Pain ◽  
Range Of Motion ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Neck Disability Index ◽  
Cervical Range Of Motion ◽  
Muscle Energy Technique ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Group A ◽  
Muscle Energy ◽  
Neck Disability

BACKGROUND Evidence till date indicates high incidence of neck pain, and soft tissue techniques [muscle energy technique (MET), strain counter strain (SCS)] have proven to be effective for non-specific neck pain (NSNP). However, their comparative effect is yet to be proven, hence the present study attempted to investigate the comparative effectiveness of MET with SCS techniques in individuals with NSNP. METHODS Total 10 participants diagnosed with NSNP were included in the study. They were allocated into two groups utilizing convenient sampling. Group A received MET with SCS technique and Group B received MET with conventional physiotherapy. The interventions were given for 2 weeks, 3 sessions per week for 45 minutes. The outcome measures used in the study were numeric pain rating scale (NPRS), neck disability index (NDI), range of motion (ROM) which were assessed before the intervention immediately after the first session and at 1st week and end of 2nd week. RESULTS Intragroup comparison found to be significantly reduced in terms of pain and neck disability index and improvement in cervical range of motion (P = < 0.05). However intergroup comparisons showed significant difference in Group A only at the end of 2nd week of intervention (P = < 0.05), but the results were not significant immediately and at the 1st week of intervention (P = > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS The study concluded that MET with SCS technique is more effective in reducing pain, neck disability and improving cervical range of motion. KEY WORDS MET, SCS, NSNP

scholarly journals Combined Deep Transverse Friction and Muscle Energy Technique on Mechanical Neck Pain: Article Review

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 17-22
Author(s):  
I Putu Mahendra Putra ◽  
Made Hendra Satria Nugraha ◽  
Ni Wayan Tianing
Keyword(s):  
Neck Pain ◽  
Pain Intensity ◽  
Direct Effect ◽  
Secondary Data ◽  
Pain Modulation ◽  
Good Effect ◽  
Local Pain ◽  
Muscle Energy Technique ◽  
Muscle Energy ◽  
Neck Disability

Introduction: Since mechanical neck pain has become a common problem, physiotherapists’ role in reducing symptoms caused by mechanical neck pain varies such as muscle energy technique and deep transverse friction. Based on the references, mechanical neck pain defined as a condition non-radicular or local pain which increased pain intensity during movement. The study aims to understand whether deep transverse friction and muscle energy technique are effective to reduce pain the mechanical neck pain.Method: The study used the secondary data through article review which focuses on the journals and articles related to the muscle energy technique and deep transverse friction in the mechanical neck pain. Results: The application and method of muscle energy technique are aimed at normalizing the structure of dysfunctional tissue, such as the shortening of muscles, which indirectly gives a direct effect on the joint. It is suggested as a method to improve the mobility of the joint. Besides, to reduce pain through pain modulation, deep transverse friction was applicable to provide it at the level of the supra-spinal to release endorphins, enkephaline, and cortisol. Conclusion: Either muscle energy technique or deep transverse friction are shown a good effect to reduce pain, neck disability, and increase ROM of the cervical joint in patients with mechanical neck pain. Besides, deep transverse friction has also reducing spasm/tightness at the cervical joint level in patients with mechanical neck pain.

Effectiveness of Laser Therapy and Ultrasound Therapy along with Muscle Energy Technique in subjects with Trapezitis

2021 ◽  
pp. 116-120
Author(s):  
K. Kotteeswaran ◽  
Syed Gaffar ◽  
Krishna. R ◽  
Keerthana Priya. R.
Keyword(s):  
Laser Therapy ◽  
Functional Disability ◽  
Neck Disability Index ◽  
Ultrasound Therapy ◽  
Muscle Energy Technique ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Group A ◽  
Muscle Energy ◽  
Group B ◽  
Neck Disability

Aim: To find the effectiveness of laser therapy and ultrasound therapy along with muscle energy technique in treatment of Trapezitis. Materials and Methods: Non-equivalent quasi experimental study design was used in this study. Total of 30 subjects with trapezitis were selected using non probability convenient sampling technique.30 Subjects was divided into two groups by lot system. Group A received laser therapy and Group B received ultrasound therapy and for both the group muscle energy technique was given. The outcome measures are Neck Disability Index (NDI) for measuring Functional Disability. Data collected and tabulated was statistically analyzed. Result: Statistical analysis of post-test, Neck Disability Index (NDI) revealed that there is statistically significant difference seen between Group A and Group B. Conclusion: From the result, it has been concluded that Laser therapy with muscle energy technique (Group A) was more effective than Ultrasound therapy with muscle energy technique (Group B) on improving functional ability in subjects with Trapezitis.

scholarly journals Effectiveness of Progressive Resisted Exercise along with Conventional Exercise and Conventional Exercise Program alone in Subjects with Text Neck Syndrome

2021 ◽  
pp. 536-542
Author(s):  
Divya Jain ◽  
Swapna Jawade ◽  
Neha Chitale
Keyword(s):  
Neck Pain ◽  
Pain Intensity ◽  
Conventional Therapy ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Neck Disability Index ◽  
Exercise Program ◽  
Pain Rating ◽  
Numerical Pain Rating Scale ◽  
Neck Disability ◽  
Pain Rating Scale

Background: "Text neck" is a term coined to describe the posture created by leaning forward for lengthy periods of time, such as when reading and texting on a cellphone which has been linked to stress injuries. Neck pain, upper back discomfort, shoulder pain, frequent headaches, and greater curvature of the spine are all dangerous indications of text neck. According to a survey, 35% of smartphone users suffer from text neck syndrome. People between the ages of 15 and 18 are more likely to have neck pain. This protocol has been created that describes the design of comparative study to evaluate effectiveness of progressive resisted exercise along with conventional exercise and conventional exercise program alone in text neck syndrome. Methods: The participants (n=80) will be recruited in the study suffering from text neck syndrome and meeting the inclusion criteria. Two groups will be formed such that patients in group A will be treated with conventional therapy and group B will be treated with progressive resisted exercise (PRE) along with conventional therapy. The protocol will cover 4 weeks of treatment. In the rehabilitation period, we will evaluate the pain intensity, strength of neck muscles and functional activity. Our outcome measures will be- Numerical pain rating scale (NPRS) and Neck disability index (NDI). Discussion: Efficacy of the intervention will be evaluated by analyzing the pain intensity by using Numerical pain rating scale (NPRS) and level of functional disability by using Neck disability index (NDI). The result of the study will significantly provide affirmation on either using combination therapy of PRE with conventional exercise or conventional exercise alone.

scholarly journals Agreement between Original and Rasch-Approved Neck Disability Index

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
ZE LU ◽  
Joy C. MacDermid ◽  
Goris Nazari
Keyword(s):  
Neck Pain ◽  
Neck Disability Index ◽  
Secondary Data ◽  
Study Data ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
Patient Status ◽  
Alternate Forms ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Mean Differences ◽  
Neck Disability

Abstract Background: Given the high prevalence of neck pain, the neck disability index (NDI) has been used to evaluate patient status and treatment outcomes. Modified versions were proposed as solutions to measurement deficits in the NDI. However, the original 10-item NDI was scored out of 50 and is still the most frequently administered version. Examining the extent of agreement between traditional and Rasch-based versions using Bland-Altman (B&A) plots will inform our understanding of score differences that might rise from using different versions. Therefore, the objective of current study was to describe the extent of agreement between different versions of NDI.Methods: The current study was a secondary data analysis. The study data was compiled from two prospectively collected data sources. We performed a comprehensive literature search to identify Rasch approved NDI within four databases including Embase, Medline, PubMed, and Google Scholar. Alternate forms and scorings were compared to each other and to the standard NDI. We graphed B&A plots and calculated the mean difference and the 95% limits of agreement (LoA; ±1.96 times the standard deviation).Results: Two Rasch approved alternative versions (8 vs 5 items) were identified from 303 screened publications. We analyzed data from 201 (43 males and 158 females) patients attending community clinics for neck pain. We found that the mean difference was approximately 10% of the total score between the 10-item and 5-item (-4.6 points), whereas the 10-item versus 8-item and 8-item versus 5-item had smaller mean differences (-2.3 points). The B&A plots displayed wider 95% LoA for the agreement between 10-item and 8-item (LoA: -12.0, 7.4) and 5-item (LoA: -14.9, 5.8) compared with the LoA for the 8-item and 5-item (LoA: -7.8, 3.3). Conclusion: Two Rasch-based NDI solutions (8 vs 5 items) which differ in number of items and conceptual construction are available to provide interval level scoring. They both provide scores that are substantially different from the ordinal NDI, which does not provide interval level scoring. Smaller differences between the two Rasch solutions exist and may relate to the items included. Due to the size and unpredictable nature of the bias between measures, they should not be used interchangeably.

scholarly journals Effects of Deep Cervical Flexor Training on Forward Head Posture, Neck Pain, and Functional Status in Adolescents Using Computer Regularly

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Isha Sikka ◽  
Chandan Chawla ◽  
Shveta Seth ◽  
Ahmad H. Alghadir ◽  
Masood Khan
Keyword(s):  
Neck Pain ◽  
Functional Status ◽  
Neck Disability Index ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Forward Head Posture ◽  
Head Posture ◽  
Photographic Analysis ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Neck Disability ◽  
Experimental Group

In contemporary societies, computer use by children is a necessity and thus highly prevalent. Using computers for long hours is related to a higher risk of computer-related muscular disorders like forward head posture (FHP) and neck pain (NP). Deep cervical flexor (DCF) muscles are important head-on-neck posture stabilizers; thus, their training may lead to an improvement in FHP and NP. The aim of this study was to determine if 4 weeks of DCF training is effective in alleviating NP, improving FHP, and functional status in adolescent children using computers regularly, a pretest-posttest experimental group design was used. Subjects were randomly assigned into the experimental group (receiving DCF training and postural education) and the control group (receiving postural education only). 30 subjects with a mean age of 15.7 ± 1.725 years with NP and FHP using computers regularly participated in the study. Dependent variables were measured on day 1 (at baseline) and after 4 weeks of training. Photographic analysis was used for measuring FHP, visual analog scale for NP intensity, and neck disability index for functional status. Data analysis showed that in both groups, no significant improvement occurred in FHP. In both groups, there was a significant improvement in functional status and NP. There was no significant difference between both groups for FHP and NP. There was a significant improvement in functional status in the experimental group in comparison to the control group. Four weeks of DCF training does not cause a significant improvement in FHP in 13 to 18 years old adolescent children using computers regularly.

scholarly journals Agreement between Original and Rasch-Approved Neck Disability Index

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
ZE LU ◽  
Joy C. MacDermid ◽  
Goris Nazari
Keyword(s):  
Neck Pain ◽  
Neck Disability Index ◽  
Secondary Data ◽  
Study Data ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
Patient Status ◽  
High Prevalence ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Mean Differences ◽  
Neck Disability

Abstract Background: Given the high prevalence of neck pain, the neck disability index (NDI) has been used widely to evaluate patient status and treatment outcomes. Modified versions have been proposed as solutions to measurement deficits in the NDI. However, the original 10-item NDI scored out of 50 is still the commonly administered. Examining the extent of agreement between traditional and Rasch-based versions using Bland-Altman (B&A) plots will inform our understanding of score differences that might rise from using different versions. Therefore, the objective of current study was to describe the extent of agreement between different versions of NDI. Methods: The current study was a secondary data analysis where the study data was compiled from two prospectively collected data source. We performed a comprehensive literature search to identify Rasch-approved NDI within four databases including Embase, Medline, PubMed, and Google Scholar. Modified version to identify Rasch analyses which provided alternative forms and scoring. We graphed B&A plots and calculated the mean difference and the 95% limits of agreement (LoA; ±1.96 times the standard deviation). Results: Two Rasch approved alternative versions (8- and 5- item) were identified from 303 screened publications. We analyzed data from 201 (43 males and 158 females) patients attending community clinics for neck pain. We found that the mean difference was approximately 10% of the total score between the 10-item and 5-item (-4.6 points), whereas the 10-item versus 8-item and 8-item versus 5-item had smaller mean differences (-2.3 points). The B&A plots displayed wider 95% LoA for the agreement between 10-item and 8-item (LoA: -12.0, 7.4) and 5-item (LoA: -14.9, 5.8) compared with the LoA for the 8-item and 5-item (LoA: -7.8, 3.3). Conclusion: Two Rasch-based NDI solutions (8 vs 5 items) that differ in number of items and conceptual construction are available to provide interval level scoring. They both scores that are substantially different from the traditional ordinal NDI, which does not provide interval level scoring. Smaller differences between the two Rasch solutions exist and may relate to the items included. Due to the size and unpredictable nature of the bias between measures, they should not be used interchangeably.

scholarly journals COMPARING THE EFFICACY OF UPPER TRAPEZIUS KINESIOTAPING AND STRETCHING EXERCISES IN PATIENTS WITH MECHANICAL NECK ACHE

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 19-24
Author(s):  
Qurat Ul Ain Ausaf
Keyword(s):  
Physical Therapy ◽  
Muscle Strength ◽  
Neck Pain ◽  
Pain Intensity ◽  
Functional Disability ◽  
Neck Disability Index ◽  
Trapezius Muscle ◽  
Upper Trapezius ◽  
Upper Trapezius Muscle ◽  
Neck Disability

BACKGROUND AND AIM Globally, around one third of population is suffering from persistent neck pain and it is considered as 4th important source of disability in the population. Several treatment protocols are available now a day to facilitate patient recovery. Therefore, the aim of this study is to identify the effects of kinesiotaping in improving neck pain, upper trapezius muscle strength and functional disability. STUDY DESIGN Randomized controlled trial SAMPLE SIZE 68 participants were recruited for the study. METHODOLOGY All participants of age 18-40 years were assessed using assessment Performa. Pain intensity, upper trapezius muscle strength and Neck disability index were measured at baseline and after treatment sessions. Group A comprised of 34 participant, received Kinesiotaping and conventional physical therapy treatment whereas, equal number of participants were recruited in Group B that received upper trapezius stretching and conventional physical therapy. RESULT The study revealed that both interventions (Kinesiotaping and stretching) were effective i.e., <0.05 in improving pain intensity, muscle strength and functional disability in patients with mechanical neck ache but significant improvement were recorded in group treated with kinesiotaping. CONCLUSION The study concluded that both interventions are effective in improving pain intensity, muscle strength and neck disability index but kinesiotaping is more beneficial than stretching among patient with mechanical neck ache.

scholarly journals Agreement between Original and Rasch-Approved Neck Disability Index

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
ZE LU ◽  
Joy C. MacDermid ◽  
Goris Nazari
Keyword(s):  
Neck Pain ◽  
Neck Disability Index ◽  
Secondary Data ◽  
Study Data ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
Patient Status ◽  
Alternate Forms ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Mean Differences ◽  
Neck Disability

Abstract Background: Given the high prevalence of neck pain, the neck disability index (NDI) has been used to evaluate patient status and treatment outcomes. Modified versions were proposed as solutions to measurement deficits in the NDI. However, the original 10-item NDI scored out of 50 is still the most administered. Examining the extent of agreement between traditional and Rasch-based versions using Bland-Altman (B&A) plots will inform our understanding of score differences that might rise from using different versions. Therefore, the objective of current study was to describe the extent of agreement between different versions of NDI.Methods: The current study was a secondary data analysis where the study data was compiled from two prospectively collected data sources. We performed a comprehensive literature search to identify Rasch approved NDI within four databases including Embase, Medline, PubMed, and Google Scholar. Alternate forms and scoring were compared to each other and the standard NDI. We graphed B&A plots and calculated the mean difference and the 95% limits of agreement (LoA; ±1.96 times the standard deviation).Results: Two Rasch approved alternative versions (8 vs 5 items) were identified from 303 screened publications. We analyzed data from 201 (43 males and 158 females) patients attending community clinics for neck pain. We found that the mean difference was approximately 10% of the total score between the 10-item and 5-item (-4.6 points), whereas the 10-item versus 8-item and 8-item versus 5-item had smaller mean differences (-2.3 points). The B&A plots displayed wider 95% LoA for the agreement between 10-item and 8-item (LoA: -12.0, 7.4) and 5-item (LoA: -14.9, 5.8) compared with the LoA for the 8-item and 5-item (LoA: -7.8, 3.3). Conclusion: Two Rasch-based NDI solutions (8 vs 5 items) that differ in number of items and conceptual construction are available to provide interval level scoring. They both provide scores that are substantially different from the ordinal NDI, which does not provide interval level scoring. Smaller differences between the two Rasch solutions exist and may relate to the items included. Due to the size and unpredictable nature of the bias between measures, they should not be used interchangeably.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document