{"title":"Effects of muscle specific as compared to movement specific muscle energy technique in mechanical neck pain: A randomized controlled trial.","authors":"Muhammad Osama","doi":"10.3233/BMR-210293","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare the effects of muscle specific and movement specific METs in the management of mechanical neck pain.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>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).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>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.</p>","PeriodicalId":15129,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Back and Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Back and Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3233/BMR-210293","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
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.
背景:肌肉能量技术(MET)被认为是治疗颈部疼痛的有效方法,除了肌肉特异性方法外,临床医生还可采用运动特异性方法进行 MET。然而,在治疗机械性颈部疼痛方面,对肌肉能量疗法和运动能量疗法进行比较的文献还很缺乏:比较肌肉特定MET和运动特定MET在治疗机械性颈痛中的效果:对 66 名患有机械性颈部疼痛(视觉模拟量表(VAS)显示为 40-80 毫米)、年龄在 19-44 岁之间、伴有疼痛且颈椎活动受限的参与者进行了单盲平行设计随机对照试验。参加者被随机分配到两组,即肌肉特定 MET 组和运动特定 MET 组。结果测量包括 VAS、颈部残疾指数(NDI)和颈椎活动范围(ROM):结果:肌肉特定 MET 组和运动特定 MET 组在 VAS、NDI 和 ROM 方面均无明显差异(P> 0.05)。然而,在所有结果变量的前后分析中,两组都观察到了明显的差异(p< 0.05):结论:肌肉特异性 MET 和运动特异性 MET 都能有效治疗机械性颈痛,两种治疗技术之间没有明显差异。
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Back and Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation is a journal whose main focus is to present relevant information about the interdisciplinary approach to musculoskeletal rehabilitation for clinicians who treat patients with back and musculoskeletal pain complaints. It will provide readers with both 1) a general fund of knowledge on the assessment and management of specific problems and 2) new information considered to be state-of-the-art in the field. The intended audience is multidisciplinary as well as multi-specialty.
In each issue clinicians can find information which they can use in their patient setting the very next day.