A Comparison Between the Effectiveness of Tepurak Therapy Versus Deep Tissue Massage Stretching on Low Back Function in Nonspecific Low Back Pain.

Q2 Health Professions
Enggista Hendriko Delano, Wara Kushartanti, Novita Intan Arovah, Sabda Hussain As Shafi, Wahyu Aji Nugroho
{"title":"A Comparison Between the Effectiveness of Tepurak Therapy Versus Deep Tissue Massage Stretching on Low Back Function in Nonspecific Low Back Pain.","authors":"Enggista Hendriko Delano, Wara Kushartanti, Novita Intan Arovah, Sabda Hussain As Shafi, Wahyu Aji Nugroho","doi":"10.3822/ijtmb.v17i2.927","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The research carried out is a large research project that examined two different massage methods on many variables so that they can determine their effect on variables on a wider scale, namely pain, range of movement (ROM), and low back function. Pain and ROM variables have been published in different journals, and their acute effects are only known after treatment and the results are effective. This study examined the low back function variable 24, 48, and 72 hours after treatment.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to determine the effectiveness of Tepurak and deep tissue massaging with stretching (DTMS) on low back function in nonspecific low back pain (NSLBP) and conduct a comparison of the effectiveness of Tepurak versus DTMS for low back function in NSLBP.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This research is a quasi-experiment using a pre-test/post-test design to determine the difference in scores before and after treatment. The variable measured involved the low back function using the Oswestry Disability Index. Measurements were carried out four times at pre-test, 24, 48, and 72 hours after the treatments. This study used two different sample groups. The research sample consisted of 42 NSLBP sufferers who were randomly divided into two groups, A and B. Group A received Tepurak treatment, while Group B received DTMS treatment. These treatments were carried out in one treatment session.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The results of the different treatments for the low back function variables in the Tepurak treatment have a p-value of 0.000. The results of the low back function variables in the DTMS treatment have a p-value of 0.000. The results of the comparison test of Tepurak versus DTMS therapy for the low back function variable had a p-value of 0.771.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Both Tepurak and DTMS are effective in improving low back function in NSLBP cases. In comparison between Tepurak and DTMS, there was no significant difference in the effectiveness in improving low back function in NSLBP cases.</p>","PeriodicalId":39090,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Therapeutic Massage and Bodywork: Research, Education, and Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11131942/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Therapeutic Massage and Bodywork: Research, Education, and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3822/ijtmb.v17i2.927","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Health Professions","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: The research carried out is a large research project that examined two different massage methods on many variables so that they can determine their effect on variables on a wider scale, namely pain, range of movement (ROM), and low back function. Pain and ROM variables have been published in different journals, and their acute effects are only known after treatment and the results are effective. This study examined the low back function variable 24, 48, and 72 hours after treatment.

Objective: This study aimed to determine the effectiveness of Tepurak and deep tissue massaging with stretching (DTMS) on low back function in nonspecific low back pain (NSLBP) and conduct a comparison of the effectiveness of Tepurak versus DTMS for low back function in NSLBP.

Methods: This research is a quasi-experiment using a pre-test/post-test design to determine the difference in scores before and after treatment. The variable measured involved the low back function using the Oswestry Disability Index. Measurements were carried out four times at pre-test, 24, 48, and 72 hours after the treatments. This study used two different sample groups. The research sample consisted of 42 NSLBP sufferers who were randomly divided into two groups, A and B. Group A received Tepurak treatment, while Group B received DTMS treatment. These treatments were carried out in one treatment session.

Results: The results of the different treatments for the low back function variables in the Tepurak treatment have a p-value of 0.000. The results of the low back function variables in the DTMS treatment have a p-value of 0.000. The results of the comparison test of Tepurak versus DTMS therapy for the low back function variable had a p-value of 0.771.

Conclusion: Both Tepurak and DTMS are effective in improving low back function in NSLBP cases. In comparison between Tepurak and DTMS, there was no significant difference in the effectiveness in improving low back function in NSLBP cases.

特普拉克疗法与深层组织按摩拉伸法对非特异性腰背痛患者腰背功能的效果比较。
简介所开展的研究是一项大型研究项目,对两种不同的按摩方法的许多变量进行了检查,以便在更大范围内确定它们对变量的影响,即疼痛、活动范围(ROM)和腰背功能。疼痛和 ROM 变量已发表在不同的期刊上,其急性效果只有在治疗和结果有效后才能知道。本研究检查了治疗后 24、48 和 72 小时的腰背功能变量:本研究旨在确定特普拉克和深层组织拉伸按摩(DTMS)对非特异性腰背痛(NSLBP)患者腰背功能的有效性,并对特普拉克和深层组织拉伸按摩对非特异性腰背痛患者腰背功能的有效性进行比较:本研究是一项准实验,采用前测/后测设计,以确定治疗前后的评分差异。测量的变量包括使用 Oswestry 残疾指数测量的腰背功能。分别在治疗前、治疗后 24 小时、48 小时和 72 小时进行了四次测量。本研究使用了两个不同的样本组。研究样本由 42 名 NSLBP 患者组成,他们被随机分为 A、B 两组,A 组接受 Tepurak 治疗,B 组接受 DTMS 治疗。这些治疗在一个疗程内完成:特普拉克疗法中腰背功能变量的不同治疗结果的 P 值为 0.000。DTMS 治疗中腰背功能变量的结果 p 值为 0.000。在腰背功能变量方面,特普拉克与 DTMS 治疗的比较检验结果的 p 值为 0.771:结论:特普拉克和 DTMS 都能有效改善 NSLBP 病例的腰背功能。Tepurak和DTMS在改善NSLBP病例腰背功能的有效性方面没有显著差异。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
16
审稿时长
22 weeks
期刊介绍: The IJTMB is a peer-reviewed journal focusing on the research (methodological, physiological, and clinical) and professional development of therapeutic massage and bodywork and its providers, encompassing all allied health providers whose services include manually applied therapeutic massage and bodywork. The Journal provides a professional forum for editorial input; scientifically-based articles of a research, educational, and practice-oriented nature; readers’ commentaries on journal content and related professional matters; and pertinent news and announcements.
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
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