冲击波疗法和梅特兰腰部活动疗法对机械性腰痛患者的疼痛、残疾和活动范围的比较效果:试点研究

Rida Ejaz, Saba Rafique, Khizra Hamid, Qasim Raza, Shabana Haider
{"title":"冲击波疗法和梅特兰腰部活动疗法对机械性腰痛患者的疼痛、残疾和活动范围的比较效果:试点研究","authors":"Rida Ejaz, Saba Rafique, Khizra Hamid, Qasim Raza, Shabana Haider","doi":"10.25259/jmsr_42_2024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n\nLow back pain (LBP) has been considered a neuromusculoskeletal issue that affects a wide variety of populations around the globe at some stage in their life. This paper aimed to see the comparative effects of shockwave therapy and Maitland lumbar mobilizations on pain severity, disability, and range of motion (ROM) values in subjects with mechanical LBP.\n\n\n\nA randomized clinical trial was carried out involving 26 subjects divided into two groups using a random number generator table. After baseline therapy (lumbar stretches and core strengthening exercises), shockwave therapy was administered to Group A (2000 shocks/session, pressure of 2 bars, frequency 10 Hz), while Group B received Maitland lumbar mobilizations (starting from Grade 1, with 3–4 sets of oscillations with 40 counts/set, two sets of oscillation to one level below and above the affected vertebras). Both therapeutic interventions were administered for 30 days, twice a week (total of eight sessions) for individual groups.\n\n\n\nNumeric pain rating scale, Oswestry LBP disability index, lumbar flexion, and extension ROM pre- and post-treatment values showed significant differences with P < 0.05. A greater difference in mean values was observed in group B receiving Maitland mobilization as compared to group A receiving shockwave therapy. Between-group analysis showed a statistically significant difference in both groups with P < 0.005.\n\n\n\nBoth groups showed significant effects in reducing pain levels, functional disability scores, and improving flexion and extension ROM values. However, participants receiving Maitland mobilization showed more significant improvement in all variables than shockwave therapy.\n","PeriodicalId":503319,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Musculoskeletal Surgery and Research","volume":" 22","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative effects of shockwave therapy and Maitland lumbar mobilization on pain, disability, and range of motion in patients with mechanical low back pain: A pilot study\",\"authors\":\"Rida Ejaz, Saba Rafique, Khizra Hamid, Qasim Raza, Shabana Haider\",\"doi\":\"10.25259/jmsr_42_2024\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n\\nLow back pain (LBP) has been considered a neuromusculoskeletal issue that affects a wide variety of populations around the globe at some stage in their life. This paper aimed to see the comparative effects of shockwave therapy and Maitland lumbar mobilizations on pain severity, disability, and range of motion (ROM) values in subjects with mechanical LBP.\\n\\n\\n\\nA randomized clinical trial was carried out involving 26 subjects divided into two groups using a random number generator table. After baseline therapy (lumbar stretches and core strengthening exercises), shockwave therapy was administered to Group A (2000 shocks/session, pressure of 2 bars, frequency 10 Hz), while Group B received Maitland lumbar mobilizations (starting from Grade 1, with 3–4 sets of oscillations with 40 counts/set, two sets of oscillation to one level below and above the affected vertebras). Both therapeutic interventions were administered for 30 days, twice a week (total of eight sessions) for individual groups.\\n\\n\\n\\nNumeric pain rating scale, Oswestry LBP disability index, lumbar flexion, and extension ROM pre- and post-treatment values showed significant differences with P < 0.05. A greater difference in mean values was observed in group B receiving Maitland mobilization as compared to group A receiving shockwave therapy. Between-group analysis showed a statistically significant difference in both groups with P < 0.005.\\n\\n\\n\\nBoth groups showed significant effects in reducing pain levels, functional disability scores, and improving flexion and extension ROM values. However, participants receiving Maitland mobilization showed more significant improvement in all variables than shockwave therapy.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":503319,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Musculoskeletal Surgery and Research\",\"volume\":\" 22\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Musculoskeletal Surgery and Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.25259/jmsr_42_2024\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Musculoskeletal Surgery and Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.25259/jmsr_42_2024","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

腰背痛(LBP)被认为是一种神经-肌肉-骨骼问题,影响着全球不同人群一生中的某个阶段。本文旨在了解冲击波疗法和梅特兰腰部活动对机械性腰痛患者的疼痛严重程度、残疾程度和活动范围(ROM)值的比较效果。在基线治疗(腰部拉伸和核心强化训练)后,A 组接受冲击波治疗(2000 次/次,压力为 2 巴,频率为 10 赫兹),而 B 组则接受麦特兰腰部运动疗法(从 1 级开始,每组 40 次,震荡 3-4 组,在受影响椎体的下方和上方各进行两组震荡)。治疗前后的数值疼痛评分量表、Oswestry LBP 残疾指数、腰椎屈伸 ROM 均有显著差异(P < 0.05)。与接受冲击波疗法的 A 组相比,接受麦特兰运动疗法的 B 组的平均值差异更大。组间分析显示,两组的差异均有统计学意义(P < 0.005)。两组在减轻疼痛程度、功能性残疾评分以及改善屈伸ROM值方面均有显著效果。然而,与冲击波疗法相比,接受麦特兰运动疗法的参与者在所有变量上都有更明显的改善。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparative effects of shockwave therapy and Maitland lumbar mobilization on pain, disability, and range of motion in patients with mechanical low back pain: A pilot study
Low back pain (LBP) has been considered a neuromusculoskeletal issue that affects a wide variety of populations around the globe at some stage in their life. This paper aimed to see the comparative effects of shockwave therapy and Maitland lumbar mobilizations on pain severity, disability, and range of motion (ROM) values in subjects with mechanical LBP. A randomized clinical trial was carried out involving 26 subjects divided into two groups using a random number generator table. After baseline therapy (lumbar stretches and core strengthening exercises), shockwave therapy was administered to Group A (2000 shocks/session, pressure of 2 bars, frequency 10 Hz), while Group B received Maitland lumbar mobilizations (starting from Grade 1, with 3–4 sets of oscillations with 40 counts/set, two sets of oscillation to one level below and above the affected vertebras). Both therapeutic interventions were administered for 30 days, twice a week (total of eight sessions) for individual groups. Numeric pain rating scale, Oswestry LBP disability index, lumbar flexion, and extension ROM pre- and post-treatment values showed significant differences with P < 0.05. A greater difference in mean values was observed in group B receiving Maitland mobilization as compared to group A receiving shockwave therapy. Between-group analysis showed a statistically significant difference in both groups with P < 0.005. Both groups showed significant effects in reducing pain levels, functional disability scores, and improving flexion and extension ROM values. However, participants receiving Maitland mobilization showed more significant improvement in all variables than shockwave therapy.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信