Muhammad Kashif, Rahat Ayub, Sufyan Nawaz, Nimra Hanif, Aiman Shahzadi, Baseer Ullah, Wirda, Noor Fatima, Mahnoor Asif, Mahrukh Asif, Tooba Naveed, Atika Javed, Muniba Zubair, Bazal Rao, Sania Maqbool
{"title":"Mets 和静态拉伸对上交叉综合征斜方肌效果的比较","authors":"Muhammad Kashif, Rahat Ayub, Sufyan Nawaz, Nimra Hanif, Aiman Shahzadi, Baseer Ullah, Wirda, Noor Fatima, Mahnoor Asif, Mahrukh Asif, Tooba Naveed, Atika Javed, Muniba Zubair, Bazal Rao, Sania Maqbool","doi":"10.61919/jhrr.v4i2.841","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Upper cross syndrome involves an imbalance between the muscles of the anterior and upper trunk and the posterior skeletal muscles, leading to postural and functional issues. Muscle Energy Techniques (METs) and stretching exercises are common interventions, but their comparative effectiveness remains unclear.Objective: The study aimed to compare the effectiveness of METs and stretching in treating pain and improving functional status in patients with upper cross syndrome.Methods: This randomized clinical trial was conducted at the Physical Therapy Department of Mayo Hospital, Lahore, over six months. Sixty-two patients with upper cross syndrome were randomly assigned to two groups, each consisting of 31 participants. Group 1 received METs and conventional therapy, while Group 2 received static stretching and conventional therapy. The primary outcome measures were pain intensity, measured by the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), and functional status, assessed using the Neck Disability Index (NDI). The intervention period lasted four weeks, and statistical analyses were performed using SPSS version 25.Results: In Group 1, the pre-treatment VAS score was 7.41 (± 1.08), decreasing to 3.41 (± 1.11) post-treatment, while in Group 2, the VAS score dropped from 7.16 (± 1.50) to 4.87 (± 1.56). The pre-treatment NDI score in Group 1 was 40.19 (± 6.15), which improved to 32.51 (± 6.16) post-treatment. In Group 2, the NDI score improved from 40.06 (± 5.88) to 35.74 (± 5.82). Both groups demonstrated significant improvement in pain and functional status, with METs showing greater effectiveness (p < 0.05).Conclusion: Muscle Energy Techniques were more effective in reducing pain and improving functional status in patients with upper cross syndrome compared to stretching exercises.","PeriodicalId":507812,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Health and Rehabilitation Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison between Effectiveness of Mets and Static Stretching on Trapezius in Upper Cross Syndrome\",\"authors\":\"Muhammad Kashif, Rahat Ayub, Sufyan Nawaz, Nimra Hanif, Aiman Shahzadi, Baseer Ullah, Wirda, Noor Fatima, Mahnoor Asif, Mahrukh Asif, Tooba Naveed, Atika Javed, Muniba Zubair, Bazal Rao, Sania Maqbool\",\"doi\":\"10.61919/jhrr.v4i2.841\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: Upper cross syndrome involves an imbalance between the muscles of the anterior and upper trunk and the posterior skeletal muscles, leading to postural and functional issues. Muscle Energy Techniques (METs) and stretching exercises are common interventions, but their comparative effectiveness remains unclear.Objective: The study aimed to compare the effectiveness of METs and stretching in treating pain and improving functional status in patients with upper cross syndrome.Methods: This randomized clinical trial was conducted at the Physical Therapy Department of Mayo Hospital, Lahore, over six months. Sixty-two patients with upper cross syndrome were randomly assigned to two groups, each consisting of 31 participants. Group 1 received METs and conventional therapy, while Group 2 received static stretching and conventional therapy. The primary outcome measures were pain intensity, measured by the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), and functional status, assessed using the Neck Disability Index (NDI). The intervention period lasted four weeks, and statistical analyses were performed using SPSS version 25.Results: In Group 1, the pre-treatment VAS score was 7.41 (± 1.08), decreasing to 3.41 (± 1.11) post-treatment, while in Group 2, the VAS score dropped from 7.16 (± 1.50) to 4.87 (± 1.56). The pre-treatment NDI score in Group 1 was 40.19 (± 6.15), which improved to 32.51 (± 6.16) post-treatment. In Group 2, the NDI score improved from 40.06 (± 5.88) to 35.74 (± 5.82). Both groups demonstrated significant improvement in pain and functional status, with METs showing greater effectiveness (p < 0.05).Conclusion: Muscle Energy Techniques were more effective in reducing pain and improving functional status in patients with upper cross syndrome compared to stretching exercises.\",\"PeriodicalId\":507812,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Health and Rehabilitation Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Health and Rehabilitation Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.61919/jhrr.v4i2.841\",\"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 Health and Rehabilitation Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.61919/jhrr.v4i2.841","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
背景:上交叉综合征涉及躯干前部和上部肌肉与骨骼后部肌肉之间的不平衡,导致姿势和功能问题。肌肉能量技术(MET)和伸展运动是常见的干预措施,但它们的比较效果仍不明确:本研究旨在比较肌肉能量疗法和拉伸运动在治疗上交叉综合征患者疼痛和改善其功能状态方面的效果:这项随机临床试验在拉合尔梅奥医院理疗科进行,为期六个月。62 名上交叉综合征患者被随机分配到两组,每组 31 人。第一组接受 METs 和传统疗法,第二组接受静态拉伸和传统疗法。主要结果指标是疼痛强度(用视觉模拟量表(VAS)测量)和功能状态(用颈部残疾指数(NDI)评估)。干预期为四周,采用 SPSS 25 版本进行统计分析:第一组患者治疗前的 VAS 评分为 7.41(±1.08)分,治疗后降至 3.41(±1.11)分;第二组患者的 VAS 评分从 7.16(±1.50)分降至 4.87(±1.56)分。第 1 组治疗前的 NDI 得分为 40.19(± 6.15)分,治疗后提高到 32.51(± 6.16)分。第 2 组的 NDI 分数从 40.06(± 5.88)分降至 35.74(± 5.82)分。两组患者的疼痛和功能状况均有明显改善,其中肌肉能量疗法的效果更好(P < 0.05):结论:与拉伸运动相比,肌肉能量技术在减轻上交叉综合征患者的疼痛和改善其功能状况方面更为有效。
Comparison between Effectiveness of Mets and Static Stretching on Trapezius in Upper Cross Syndrome
Background: Upper cross syndrome involves an imbalance between the muscles of the anterior and upper trunk and the posterior skeletal muscles, leading to postural and functional issues. Muscle Energy Techniques (METs) and stretching exercises are common interventions, but their comparative effectiveness remains unclear.Objective: The study aimed to compare the effectiveness of METs and stretching in treating pain and improving functional status in patients with upper cross syndrome.Methods: This randomized clinical trial was conducted at the Physical Therapy Department of Mayo Hospital, Lahore, over six months. Sixty-two patients with upper cross syndrome were randomly assigned to two groups, each consisting of 31 participants. Group 1 received METs and conventional therapy, while Group 2 received static stretching and conventional therapy. The primary outcome measures were pain intensity, measured by the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), and functional status, assessed using the Neck Disability Index (NDI). The intervention period lasted four weeks, and statistical analyses were performed using SPSS version 25.Results: In Group 1, the pre-treatment VAS score was 7.41 (± 1.08), decreasing to 3.41 (± 1.11) post-treatment, while in Group 2, the VAS score dropped from 7.16 (± 1.50) to 4.87 (± 1.56). The pre-treatment NDI score in Group 1 was 40.19 (± 6.15), which improved to 32.51 (± 6.16) post-treatment. In Group 2, the NDI score improved from 40.06 (± 5.88) to 35.74 (± 5.82). Both groups demonstrated significant improvement in pain and functional status, with METs showing greater effectiveness (p < 0.05).Conclusion: Muscle Energy Techniques were more effective in reducing pain and improving functional status in patients with upper cross syndrome compared to stretching exercises.