Evidence-Based Clinical Comparison of Mulligan's Mobilization With Movement and Kaltenborn Mobilization in Elbow Recovery: A Pilot Study.

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q3 ORTHOPEDICS
Mehlaqa Waseem, Nehal Fatima, Arslan Iftikhar
{"title":"Evidence-Based Clinical Comparison of Mulligan's Mobilization With Movement and Kaltenborn Mobilization in Elbow Recovery: A Pilot Study.","authors":"Mehlaqa Waseem, Nehal Fatima, Arslan Iftikhar","doi":"10.1177/15563316261475265","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Post-traumatic stiffness is a pathological condition that results from injury and the soft tissue response, leading to reduced or lost joint motion and functional impairments.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This pilot study aimed to compare the efficacy of Kaltenborn mobilization and Mulligan Mobilization with movement (MWM) in managing post-traumatic elbow stiffness.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A 6-month prospective non-randomized comparative interventional pilot study was conducted at Independent University Hospital, Faisalabad, Pakistan. Forty-five participants were equally divided into 3 groups: Group A (Active range of motion [A-RoM] + actinotherapy), Group B (Kaltenborn Grade III glides + actinotherapy), and Group C (MWM with sustained end-range glides + actinotherapy). Baseline assessments included demographics, elbow RoM (flexion, extension, pronation, supination), manual muscle testing, Mayo Elbow Performance Score, and Numeric Pain Rating Scale. This study was registered in the Clinical Trials Registry of Australia and New Zealand (ACTRN12625000820404). Post-intervention analysis using paired <i>t</i>-tests and 2-way analysis of variance was conducted.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The interventions in Group C were associated with the greatest improvements in RoM, strength, and pain relief compared to A-RoM exercises and Kaltenborn mobilization. Kaltenborn mobilization resulted in significant clinical improvement, whereas A-RoM exercises did not show any difference.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The findings of this pilot study suggest that MWM may address biomechanical dysfunctions more effectively than Kaltenborn mobilization in patients with post-traumatic elbow stiffness. Further study is needed to confirm that MWM should be integrated into standard post-traumatic elbow rehabilitation protocols.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Level III, Therapeutic Study.</p>","PeriodicalId":35357,"journal":{"name":"Hss Journal","volume":" ","pages":"15563316261475265"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13490318/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hss Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15563316261475265","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Post-traumatic stiffness is a pathological condition that results from injury and the soft tissue response, leading to reduced or lost joint motion and functional impairments.

Purpose: This pilot study aimed to compare the efficacy of Kaltenborn mobilization and Mulligan Mobilization with movement (MWM) in managing post-traumatic elbow stiffness.

Methods: A 6-month prospective non-randomized comparative interventional pilot study was conducted at Independent University Hospital, Faisalabad, Pakistan. Forty-five participants were equally divided into 3 groups: Group A (Active range of motion [A-RoM] + actinotherapy), Group B (Kaltenborn Grade III glides + actinotherapy), and Group C (MWM with sustained end-range glides + actinotherapy). Baseline assessments included demographics, elbow RoM (flexion, extension, pronation, supination), manual muscle testing, Mayo Elbow Performance Score, and Numeric Pain Rating Scale. This study was registered in the Clinical Trials Registry of Australia and New Zealand (ACTRN12625000820404). Post-intervention analysis using paired t-tests and 2-way analysis of variance was conducted.

Results: The interventions in Group C were associated with the greatest improvements in RoM, strength, and pain relief compared to A-RoM exercises and Kaltenborn mobilization. Kaltenborn mobilization resulted in significant clinical improvement, whereas A-RoM exercises did not show any difference.

Conclusion: The findings of this pilot study suggest that MWM may address biomechanical dysfunctions more effectively than Kaltenborn mobilization in patients with post-traumatic elbow stiffness. Further study is needed to confirm that MWM should be integrated into standard post-traumatic elbow rehabilitation protocols.

Level of evidence: Level III, Therapeutic Study.

基于证据的Mulligan’s mobilewith Movement和Kaltenborn mobilewith肘关节恢复的临床比较:一项初步研究。
背景:创伤后僵硬是一种由损伤和软组织反应引起的病理状态,导致关节运动减少或丧失和功能障碍。目的:本初步研究旨在比较Kaltenborn移位术和Mulligan移位术(MWM)治疗创伤后肘关节僵硬的疗效。方法:在巴基斯坦费萨拉巴德独立大学医院进行了一项为期6个月的前瞻性非随机比较介入试验研究。45名参与者平均分为3组:A组(活动范围[A- rom] +放射线治疗),B组(Kaltenborn III级滑动+放射线治疗)和C组(持续终末范围滑动+放射线治疗的MWM)。基线评估包括人口统计学、肘关节活动度(屈曲、伸展、旋前、旋后)、手工肌肉测试、梅奥肘关节表现评分和数字疼痛评定量表。本研究已在澳大利亚和新西兰临床试验登记处注册(ACTRN12625000820404)。干预后分析采用配对t检验和双向方差分析。结果:与A-RoM运动和Kaltenborn运动相比,C组的干预措施在RoM、力量和疼痛缓解方面有最大的改善。Kaltenborn运动导致显著的临床改善,而A-RoM运动没有表现出任何差异。结论:这项初步研究的结果表明,MWM可能比Kaltenborn活动更有效地解决创伤后肘关节僵硬患者的生物力学功能障碍。需要进一步的研究来证实MWM应该被纳入标准的创伤后肘部康复方案。证据等级:III级,治疗性研究。
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
Hss Journal
Hss Journal Medicine-Surgery
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
42
期刊介绍: The HSS Journal is the Musculoskeletal Journal of Hospital for Special Surgery. The aim of the HSS Journal is to promote cutting edge research, clinical pathways, and state-of-the-art techniques that inform and facilitate the continuing education of the orthopaedic and musculoskeletal communities. HSS Journal publishes articles that offer contributions to the advancement of the knowledge of musculoskeletal diseases and encourages submission of manuscripts from all musculoskeletal disciplines.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书