Immediate Effects of Mulligan Mobilization on Elbow Proprioception in Healthy Individuals: A Randomized Placebo-Controlled Single-Blind Study

IF 1.2 4区医学 Q4 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI:10.1016/j.jmpt.2023.05.001

Kevser Sevik Kacmaz PT, MSc , Bayram Unver PhD, PT

{"title":"Immediate Effects of Mulligan Mobilization on Elbow Proprioception in Healthy Individuals: A Randomized Placebo-Controlled Single-Blind Study","authors":"Kevser Sevik Kacmaz PT, MSc , Bayram Unver PhD, PT","doi":"10.1016/j.jmpt.2023.05.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>The aim of this study was to investigate the immediate effects of Mulligan's mobilization with movement (MWM) on elbow proprioception.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>The study included 26 participants in the intervention group and 30 participants in the control group. The intervention group received MWM, while the control group received a sham application. Proprioception was assessed with joint position sense error at baseline, immediately after mobilization, and 30 minutes after mobilization with 70° and 110° of elbow flexion. The hypothesis of interest was the group × time interaction.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>At 110° of elbow flexion, group × time interaction was significant (F[2, 108] = 11.48, <em>P</em> = .001). In the paired comparisons, there was a statistically significant difference in favor of the control group in the first measurement (<em>P</em> = .003). No difference was detected in other time points (<em>P</em> = 1.00). At 70° of elbow flexion, there was no significant difference between the time point × group interaction (F[2, 108] = 1.37, <em>P</em> = .10). Therefore, no pairwise comparison was made.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>In this study of healthy participants, no immediate difference was found between MWM and sham application on elbow proprioception.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":16132,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0161475423000271","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

The aim of this study was to investigate the immediate effects of Mulligan's mobilization with movement (MWM) on elbow proprioception.

Methods

The study included 26 participants in the intervention group and 30 participants in the control group. The intervention group received MWM, while the control group received a sham application. Proprioception was assessed with joint position sense error at baseline, immediately after mobilization, and 30 minutes after mobilization with 70° and 110° of elbow flexion. The hypothesis of interest was the group × time interaction.

Results

At 110° of elbow flexion, group × time interaction was significant (F[2, 108] = 11.48, P = .001). In the paired comparisons, there was a statistically significant difference in favor of the control group in the first measurement (P = .003). No difference was detected in other time points (P = 1.00). At 70° of elbow flexion, there was no significant difference between the time point × group interaction (F[2, 108] = 1.37, P = .10). Therefore, no pairwise comparison was made.

Conclusion

In this study of healthy participants, no immediate difference was found between MWM and sham application on elbow proprioception.

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

Mulligan活动对健康个体肘关节本体感觉的直接影响:一项随机安慰剂对照单盲研究

目的探讨Mulligan's mobilewith movement (MWM)对肘关节本体感觉的直接影响。方法干预组26例，对照组30例。干预组接受MWM，对照组接受假应用。以关节位置感觉误差在基线、活动后立即和活动后30分钟进行本体感觉评估，肘关节屈曲70°和110°。感兴趣的假设是组×时间相互作用。结果肘关节屈曲110°时，组×时间交互作用显著(F[2,108] = 11.48, P = .001)。在配对比较中，第一次测量中，对照组的优势有统计学意义(P = 0.003)。其他时间点差异无统计学意义(P = 1.00)。在肘关节屈曲70°时，时间点与组间交互作用无显著差异(F[2,108] = 1.37, P = .10)。因此，没有进行两两比较。结论在健康受试者中，MWM与假应用在肘关节本体感受上无直接差异。

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

Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics 医学-康复医学

CiteScore

3.00

自引率

7.70%

发文量

审稿时长

29 weeks

期刊介绍： The Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics (JMPT) is an international and interdisciplinary journal dedicated to the advancement of conservative health care principles and practices. The JMPT is the premier biomedical publication in the chiropractic profession and publishes peer reviewed, research articles and the Journal''s editorial board includes leading researchers from around the world. The Journal publishes original primary research and review articles of the highest quality in relevant topic areas. The JMPT addresses practitioners and researchers needs by adding to their clinical and basic science knowledge and by informing them about relevant issues that influence health care practices.