Comparison of isometric neck exercises and stretching with ergonomic modifications versus isometric neck exercises and stretching for mechanical neck pain: A randomized controlled trail

Shahrukh Mehtab, Nafeesa zamurd
{"title":"Comparison of isometric neck exercises and stretching with ergonomic modifications versus isometric neck exercises and stretching for mechanical neck pain: A randomized controlled trail","authors":"Shahrukh Mehtab, Nafeesa zamurd","doi":"10.5455/JRCRS.2019070103","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Mechanical neck pain is the most common musculoskeletal disorder of general population. Mechanical neck pain is also known as axial neck pain or nonspecific neck pain as it is non radiating pain and has an acute or sudden onset without known etiology. \nObjective: To compare the effectiveness of isometric exercises and stretching versus isometric exercises and stretching with ergonomic modifications for mechanical neck pain. \nMaterial and Methods: This is an RCT randomized control trial, single blind study which consists of 30 subjects (n=30) of age 20-45 years, with 15 subjects (n=15) in experimental group (isometric exercises and stretchings with ergonomic modifications were applied) and 15 subjects (n=15) in control group (isometric exercises and stretchings were applied).Duration of study was 6 months. Pre and post treatment assessment was done. Interventions were applied with moderate intensity 3 times a week (10rep/ 3 set per day) for 4 weeks (12 sessions) in both groups. Questionnaire, visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain intensity and neck disability index (NDI) for functional disability was used as data collection tools. Level of significance a= 5 % or 0.05, P value 0.05, Confidence interval0.95 and power 0.8. Sample size was calculated through epitool. \nResults: Both VAS and NDI scores showed more improvement in experimental group (isometric neck exercises and stretching with ergonomic modifications) as compared to control group (isometric neck exercises and stretching). One way ANOVA was used for between group analysis and paired t-test was used for within group analysis. As P-value < 0.05 so we rejected null hypothesis, there is a significant difference between groups. \nConclusion: This study concluded that ergonomic modifications with isometric exercises and stretching result in improvement of posture, reduce muscle stress, increase muscle balance, increase range of motion as compared to isometric exercises and stretching. Isometric exercises and stretching cause removal of waste product from neck muscles by improving blood circulation that reduce muscle stiffness and spasm which causes pain relief and improves range of motion and ergonomic modifications improve posture alignment of body that reduce stress, increase muscular balance and reduce muscle spasm.","PeriodicalId":127606,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Riphah College of Rehabilitation Sciences","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Riphah College of Rehabilitation Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5455/JRCRS.2019070103","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Mechanical neck pain is the most common musculoskeletal disorder of general population. Mechanical neck pain is also known as axial neck pain or nonspecific neck pain as it is non radiating pain and has an acute or sudden onset without known etiology. Objective: To compare the effectiveness of isometric exercises and stretching versus isometric exercises and stretching with ergonomic modifications for mechanical neck pain. Material and Methods: This is an RCT randomized control trial, single blind study which consists of 30 subjects (n=30) of age 20-45 years, with 15 subjects (n=15) in experimental group (isometric exercises and stretchings with ergonomic modifications were applied) and 15 subjects (n=15) in control group (isometric exercises and stretchings were applied).Duration of study was 6 months. Pre and post treatment assessment was done. Interventions were applied with moderate intensity 3 times a week (10rep/ 3 set per day) for 4 weeks (12 sessions) in both groups. Questionnaire, visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain intensity and neck disability index (NDI) for functional disability was used as data collection tools. Level of significance a= 5 % or 0.05, P value 0.05, Confidence interval0.95 and power 0.8. Sample size was calculated through epitool. Results: Both VAS and NDI scores showed more improvement in experimental group (isometric neck exercises and stretching with ergonomic modifications) as compared to control group (isometric neck exercises and stretching). One way ANOVA was used for between group analysis and paired t-test was used for within group analysis. As P-value < 0.05 so we rejected null hypothesis, there is a significant difference between groups. Conclusion: This study concluded that ergonomic modifications with isometric exercises and stretching result in improvement of posture, reduce muscle stress, increase muscle balance, increase range of motion as compared to isometric exercises and stretching. Isometric exercises and stretching cause removal of waste product from neck muscles by improving blood circulation that reduce muscle stiffness and spasm which causes pain relief and improves range of motion and ergonomic modifications improve posture alignment of body that reduce stress, increase muscular balance and reduce muscle spasm.
等距颈部运动和拉伸与人体工程学修改的等距颈部运动和拉伸对机械颈部疼痛的比较:随机对照试验
背景:机械性颈痛是普通人群中最常见的肌肉骨骼疾病。机械性颈痛也被称为轴性颈痛或非特异性颈痛,因为它是一种非辐射性疼痛,有急性或突然发作,没有已知的病因。目的:比较等长运动和拉伸与等长运动和拉伸配合人体工程学改造治疗机械性颈痛的效果。材料与方法:这是一项随机对照试验,单盲研究,30名年龄在20-45岁的受试者(n=30),实验组15名(n=15)(采用人体工程学修饰的等距运动和拉伸),对照组15名(n=15)(采用等距运动和拉伸)。研究时间为6个月。进行治疗前后评价。两组均采用中等强度干预措施,每周3次(每天10次/ 3组),持续4周(12次)。采用问卷调查、疼痛强度视觉模拟量表(VAS)和功能残疾颈部残疾指数(NDI)作为数据收集工具。显著性水平a= 5%或0.05,P值0.05,置信区间0.95,幂值0.8。通过epitool计算样品大小。结果:试验组(等距颈部运动和符合人体工程学的拉伸)的VAS和NDI评分均较对照组(等距颈部运动和拉伸)有较大改善。组间分析采用单因素方差分析,组内分析采用配对t检验。由于p值< 0.05,因此我们拒绝原假设,组间存在显著差异。结论:本研究得出的结论是,与等距运动和拉伸相比,等距运动和拉伸的人体工程学修改可以改善姿势,减少肌肉压力,增加肌肉平衡,增加运动范围。等长运动和伸展运动通过改善血液循环,减少肌肉僵硬和痉挛,从而减轻疼痛,改善运动范围,从而消除颈部肌肉中的废物,改善人体姿势,减轻压力,增加肌肉平衡,减少肌肉痉挛。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信