Effects of neuromuscular taping as an independent or complementary method to physiotherapeutic treatment in the management of cervical pain

Ximena María Villota-Chicaíza, J. Fernández-Niño
{"title":"Effects of neuromuscular taping as an independent or complementary method to physiotherapeutic treatment in the management of cervical pain","authors":"Ximena María Villota-Chicaíza, J. Fernández-Niño","doi":"10.18273/REVSAL.V50N3-2018001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: Neck pain is one of the most prevalent musculoskeletal pathologies. There is, however, no evidence of the effectiveness of neuromuscular taping versus physiotherapy, or of their combined therapy. Objectives: To analyze: the effects of taping compared with those of a physiotherapy program; and the additional benefits that could be obtained if these two therapies were combined in the management of neck pain. Methodology: A total of 60 patients diagnosed with cervical pain were selected and a quasi-experimental pre-post parallel, four-arm simple blind design was utilized: physiotherapy alone; taping alone; physiotherapy plus taping; and taping plus physiotherapy. The effects were estimated, using fixed effects models, for pain at rest, on palpation and in movement. Results: The greatest intra-individual change was found with physiotherapy (β=−1.81; CI95%: −2.69 to −0.93), followed by the physiotherapy plus taping (β=−1.57; CI95%: −2.32 to −0.83), then taping plus physiotherapy (β=−1.29; CI95%: −1.98 to −0.60). Taping alone, however, achieved only a marginally significant reduction (β=−0.50; CI95%: −1.11 to 0.10). Regarding palpation pain, a statistically significant reduction was only observed for physiotherapy (β=−0.84; CI95%: −1.56 to −0.11) and physiotherapy plus taping (β=−0.52; CI95%: −1.09 to 0.04). Finally, for movement pain, a statistically significant reduction for physiotherapy was observed (β=−1.28; CI95%: −2.02 to −0.55) and very similar reductions were observed for physiotherapy plus taping and taping plus physiotherapy. Conclusion: According to the results of the present study, physiotherapy would be the most effective treatment for cervical pain.","PeriodicalId":31194,"journal":{"name":"Revista de la Universidad Industrial de Santander Salud","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-07-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.18273/REVSAL.V50N3-2018001","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista de la Universidad Industrial de Santander Salud","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18273/REVSAL.V50N3-2018001","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Introduction: Neck pain is one of the most prevalent musculoskeletal pathologies. There is, however, no evidence of the effectiveness of neuromuscular taping versus physiotherapy, or of their combined therapy. Objectives: To analyze: the effects of taping compared with those of a physiotherapy program; and the additional benefits that could be obtained if these two therapies were combined in the management of neck pain. Methodology: A total of 60 patients diagnosed with cervical pain were selected and a quasi-experimental pre-post parallel, four-arm simple blind design was utilized: physiotherapy alone; taping alone; physiotherapy plus taping; and taping plus physiotherapy. The effects were estimated, using fixed effects models, for pain at rest, on palpation and in movement. Results: The greatest intra-individual change was found with physiotherapy (β=−1.81; CI95%: −2.69 to −0.93), followed by the physiotherapy plus taping (β=−1.57; CI95%: −2.32 to −0.83), then taping plus physiotherapy (β=−1.29; CI95%: −1.98 to −0.60). Taping alone, however, achieved only a marginally significant reduction (β=−0.50; CI95%: −1.11 to 0.10). Regarding palpation pain, a statistically significant reduction was only observed for physiotherapy (β=−0.84; CI95%: −1.56 to −0.11) and physiotherapy plus taping (β=−0.52; CI95%: −1.09 to 0.04). Finally, for movement pain, a statistically significant reduction for physiotherapy was observed (β=−1.28; CI95%: −2.02 to −0.55) and very similar reductions were observed for physiotherapy plus taping and taping plus physiotherapy. Conclusion: According to the results of the present study, physiotherapy would be the most effective treatment for cervical pain.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
神经肌肉贴敷作为物理治疗的独立或补充方法在治疗颈椎疼痛中的作用
引言:颈部疼痛是最常见的肌肉骨骼疾病之一。然而,没有证据表明神经肌肉贴扎与物理疗法或其联合治疗的有效性。目的:分析:与物理治疗程序相比,胶带的效果;以及如果将这两种疗法结合起来治疗颈部疼痛可能获得的额外益处。方法:共选择60名被诊断为宫颈疼痛的患者,采用准实验性前后平行、四臂简单盲设计:单独理疗;单独录制;理疗加胶带;录音和理疗。使用固定效应模型对休息、触诊和运动时的疼痛进行了评估。结果:个体内变化最大的是物理治疗(β=−1.81;CI95%:−2.69至−0.93),其次是物理治疗加贴敷(β=–1.57;CI95%:−2.32至−0.83),然后是贴敷加物理治疗(α=−1.29;CI95%:−1.98至−0.60),仅实现了轻微的显著减少(β=−0.50;CI95%:−1.11至0.10)。关于触诊疼痛,仅在物理治疗(β=–0.84;CI95%:−1.56至−0.11)和物理治疗加胶带治疗(β=−0.52;CI95%:−1.09至0.04)中观察到统计学上的显著减少。最后,对于运动疼痛,观察到物理治疗在统计学上显著减少(β=−1.28;CI95%:−2.02至−0.55),物理治疗加胶带和胶带加物理治疗也观察到非常相似的减少。结论:根据本研究的结果,物理疗法将是治疗宫颈疼痛最有效的方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
68
审稿时长
18 weeks
期刊最新文献
Una aplicación móvil de ayuda para estudiantes de epidemiología: evaluación preliminar de EpiApp Aseguramiento y control de la calidad de los datos en un estudio de cohorte en Colombia Promoción del profesionalismo médico en la formación de los estudiantes de medicina Prevention of osteoporosis in population older than 50 from Colombia: An intervention model nutrieconomics perspective Camino a una licencia obligatoria para el dolutegravir en Colombia
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1