M. Grase, Haytham M. Elhafez, Menna M Abdellatif, Ahmed F. Genedi, Mayada A. Mahmoud
{"title":"器械辅助软组织活动与运动带治疗慢性机械性腰痛的效果:一项随机对照试验","authors":"M. Grase, Haytham M. Elhafez, Menna M Abdellatif, Ahmed F. Genedi, Mayada A. Mahmoud","doi":"10.5114/pq.2023.125742","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction. The primary purpose was to compare the effect of conventional program, instrument assisted soft tissue mobilization (iASTM) and kinesiotape (KT) in patients with chronic mechanical low back pain (CMLBP). Methods. 51 participants were randomly enrolled into three equal groups. Group A ( n = 17) received conventional program, Group B ( n = 17) received conventional program plus iASTM, and Group C ( n = 17) received conventional program plus KT. The participants were evaluated before and after eight sessions using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), pressure algometer, dual inclinometer, and oswestry disability index (odi). Results. Between pre-treatment and post-treatment, the three groups demonstrated a significant pain reduction (57.2%, 61.2%, and 57.77%; p < 0.0001), a significant increase in pain pressure threshold (PPT) [right (Rt): 56%, 53.2%, and 35.6%; left (Lt): 49%, 50.55%, and 41.36%; p < 0.0001], a significant improvement in the range of motion (RoM) (flexion: 38.59%, 43.55%, and 35.7%; extension: 72.4%, 88.73%, and 65.56%; Rt lateral flexion: 79.05%, 78.03%, and 55.42%; Lt lateral flexion: 85.33%, 96.37%, and 64.66%; Rt rotation 135%, 116.5%, and 188.48%; Lt rotation: 203%, 140.48%, and 224.24%; p < 0.0001), and a significant improvement in the functional disability index (56.8%, 49.55%, and 46.99%; p < 0.0001). No significant difference in pain, PPT, RoM and function was found among the three groups. Conclusions. Conventional program, iASTM and KT are effective methods for improving pain, RoM and function on CMLBP.","PeriodicalId":37315,"journal":{"name":"Physiotherapy Quarterly","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effect of instrument assisted soft tissue mobilization versus kinesiotape\\nfor chronic mechanical low back pain: a randomized controlled trial\",\"authors\":\"M. Grase, Haytham M. Elhafez, Menna M Abdellatif, Ahmed F. Genedi, Mayada A. Mahmoud\",\"doi\":\"10.5114/pq.2023.125742\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Introduction. The primary purpose was to compare the effect of conventional program, instrument assisted soft tissue mobilization (iASTM) and kinesiotape (KT) in patients with chronic mechanical low back pain (CMLBP). Methods. 51 participants were randomly enrolled into three equal groups. Group A ( n = 17) received conventional program, Group B ( n = 17) received conventional program plus iASTM, and Group C ( n = 17) received conventional program plus KT. The participants were evaluated before and after eight sessions using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), pressure algometer, dual inclinometer, and oswestry disability index (odi). Results. Between pre-treatment and post-treatment, the three groups demonstrated a significant pain reduction (57.2%, 61.2%, and 57.77%; p < 0.0001), a significant increase in pain pressure threshold (PPT) [right (Rt): 56%, 53.2%, and 35.6%; left (Lt): 49%, 50.55%, and 41.36%; p < 0.0001], a significant improvement in the range of motion (RoM) (flexion: 38.59%, 43.55%, and 35.7%; extension: 72.4%, 88.73%, and 65.56%; Rt lateral flexion: 79.05%, 78.03%, and 55.42%; Lt lateral flexion: 85.33%, 96.37%, and 64.66%; Rt rotation 135%, 116.5%, and 188.48%; Lt rotation: 203%, 140.48%, and 224.24%; p < 0.0001), and a significant improvement in the functional disability index (56.8%, 49.55%, and 46.99%; p < 0.0001). No significant difference in pain, PPT, RoM and function was found among the three groups. Conclusions. Conventional program, iASTM and KT are effective methods for improving pain, RoM and function on CMLBP.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37315,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Physiotherapy Quarterly\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Physiotherapy Quarterly\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5114/pq.2023.125742\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Health Professions\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Physiotherapy Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5114/pq.2023.125742","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Health Professions","Score":null,"Total":0}
Effect of instrument assisted soft tissue mobilization versus kinesiotape
for chronic mechanical low back pain: a randomized controlled trial
Introduction. The primary purpose was to compare the effect of conventional program, instrument assisted soft tissue mobilization (iASTM) and kinesiotape (KT) in patients with chronic mechanical low back pain (CMLBP). Methods. 51 participants were randomly enrolled into three equal groups. Group A ( n = 17) received conventional program, Group B ( n = 17) received conventional program plus iASTM, and Group C ( n = 17) received conventional program plus KT. The participants were evaluated before and after eight sessions using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), pressure algometer, dual inclinometer, and oswestry disability index (odi). Results. Between pre-treatment and post-treatment, the three groups demonstrated a significant pain reduction (57.2%, 61.2%, and 57.77%; p < 0.0001), a significant increase in pain pressure threshold (PPT) [right (Rt): 56%, 53.2%, and 35.6%; left (Lt): 49%, 50.55%, and 41.36%; p < 0.0001], a significant improvement in the range of motion (RoM) (flexion: 38.59%, 43.55%, and 35.7%; extension: 72.4%, 88.73%, and 65.56%; Rt lateral flexion: 79.05%, 78.03%, and 55.42%; Lt lateral flexion: 85.33%, 96.37%, and 64.66%; Rt rotation 135%, 116.5%, and 188.48%; Lt rotation: 203%, 140.48%, and 224.24%; p < 0.0001), and a significant improvement in the functional disability index (56.8%, 49.55%, and 46.99%; p < 0.0001). No significant difference in pain, PPT, RoM and function was found among the three groups. Conclusions. Conventional program, iASTM and KT are effective methods for improving pain, RoM and function on CMLBP.
Physiotherapy QuarterlyHealth Professions-Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
33
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍:
Physiotherapy Quarterly ISSN 2544-4395 (formerly Fizjoterapia ISSN 1230-8323) is an international scientific peer-reviewed journal, published in both paper and electronic format by the University School of Physical Education in Wroclaw, Poland. The original version of the journal is its paper issue. The Editorial Office accepts original papers on various aspects of physiotherapy and rehabilitation for publication. Manuscripts in basic science and clinical physiotherapy science are published at the highest priority. Letters to the Editor, reports from scientific meetings and book reviews are also considered. Physiotherapy Quarterly publishes papers that show depth, rigor, originality and high-quality presentation. The scope of the journal: evidence-based rehabilitation; the mechanisms of function or dysfunction; modern therapy methods; best clinical practice; clinical reasoning and decision-making processes; assessment and clinical management of disorders; exploration of relevant clinical interventions; multi-modal approaches; psychosocial issues; expectations, experiences, and perspectives of physiotherapists. Quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods research articles are welcomed, together with systematic and high-quality narrative reviews.