Mulligan活动技术与Mckenzie运动对骶髂关节功能障碍患者的比较:一项随机临床试验

Faisal Ghafoor, Zunairah Ahmad, Afia Irfan, A. Munawar, Iqra Sabir, Faseeh Zulqernain
{"title":"Mulligan活动技术与Mckenzie运动对骶髂关节功能障碍患者的比较:一项随机临床试验","authors":"Faisal Ghafoor, Zunairah Ahmad, Afia Irfan, A. Munawar, Iqra Sabir, Faseeh Zulqernain","doi":"10.26502/josm.511500093","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Sacroiliac joint dysfunction frequently causes pain in low back. Localized tenderness and pain around the sacroiliac joint are signs. Objective: This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of mulligan mobilization Technique Versus McKenzie exercises among patients with sacroiliac joint Dysfunction. Methodology: Total 58 patients, with sacroiliac joint dysfunction were included who were fulfilled the eligibility criteria. This trial was registered in Iranian registry with ref#NCT05404451 Dated 01-08-2022. This study is assessor blind. We have used the convenient sampling technique and the Lottery Method was used to randomly select. Participants were then divided into the two groups at random. The researcher and participants were not informed of the allocation process. In envelopes, the allocation was concealed. Group A received treatment with mulligan mobilization technique while group B received treatment with McKenzie exercises. Both groups received treatment for four weeks. Using the VAS and the MODI scale, pain and disability were evaluated before and after treatment. Results: It was observed that McKenzie exercises were more effective than Mulligan mobilization techniques at reducing pain, disability, and enhancing sitting, standing, and walking in patients P value was (>0.005). While there was no significant difference has been observed in personal care lifting, sleeping, when comparing both groups P value was (>0.005). Conclusion: The McKenzie exercises are more efficient than Mulligan's Mobilization technique when the two groups are compared (at reducing pain, disability, and enhancing sitting, standing, and walking in patients).","PeriodicalId":73881,"journal":{"name":"Journal of orthopaedics and sports medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of Mulligan Mobilization Technique versus Mckenzie Exercises among Patient with Sacroilliac Joint Dysfunction: A Randomized Clinical Trial\",\"authors\":\"Faisal Ghafoor, Zunairah Ahmad, Afia Irfan, A. Munawar, Iqra Sabir, Faseeh Zulqernain\",\"doi\":\"10.26502/josm.511500093\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: Sacroiliac joint dysfunction frequently causes pain in low back. Localized tenderness and pain around the sacroiliac joint are signs. Objective: This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of mulligan mobilization Technique Versus McKenzie exercises among patients with sacroiliac joint Dysfunction. Methodology: Total 58 patients, with sacroiliac joint dysfunction were included who were fulfilled the eligibility criteria. This trial was registered in Iranian registry with ref#NCT05404451 Dated 01-08-2022. This study is assessor blind. We have used the convenient sampling technique and the Lottery Method was used to randomly select. Participants were then divided into the two groups at random. The researcher and participants were not informed of the allocation process. In envelopes, the allocation was concealed. Group A received treatment with mulligan mobilization technique while group B received treatment with McKenzie exercises. Both groups received treatment for four weeks. Using the VAS and the MODI scale, pain and disability were evaluated before and after treatment. Results: It was observed that McKenzie exercises were more effective than Mulligan mobilization techniques at reducing pain, disability, and enhancing sitting, standing, and walking in patients P value was (>0.005). While there was no significant difference has been observed in personal care lifting, sleeping, when comparing both groups P value was (>0.005). Conclusion: The McKenzie exercises are more efficient than Mulligan's Mobilization technique when the two groups are compared (at reducing pain, disability, and enhancing sitting, standing, and walking in patients).\",\"PeriodicalId\":73881,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of orthopaedics and sports medicine\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of orthopaedics and sports medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.26502/josm.511500093\",\"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 orthopaedics and sports medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.26502/josm.511500093","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:骶髂关节功能障碍常引起腰痛。骶髂关节周围的局部压痛和疼痛是征象。目的:本研究旨在比较mulligan活动技术与McKenzie运动对骶髂关节功能障碍患者的疗效。方法:共纳入58例符合入选标准的骶髂关节功能障碍患者。该试验已在伊朗注册,编号为NCT05404451,日期为01-08-2022。这项研究是盲评估的。我们采用了方便的抽样技术,采用摇号法进行随机选择。然后参与者被随机分为两组。研究人员和参与者不被告知分配过程。钱藏在信封里。A组采用mulligan活动技术治疗,B组采用McKenzie运动治疗。两组均接受为期四周的治疗。采用VAS和MODI评分法对治疗前后的疼痛和残疾进行评估。结果:观察到McKenzie运动比Mulligan活动技术在减轻患者疼痛、残疾和增强患者坐、站、行能力方面更有效,P值为(>0.005)。而在个人护理提升、睡眠方面,两组比较P值为(>0.005),差异无统计学意义。结论:当两组比较时,McKenzie练习比Mulligan’s mobiletechnique更有效(在减轻疼痛、残疾和增强患者的坐、站、行)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison of Mulligan Mobilization Technique versus Mckenzie Exercises among Patient with Sacroilliac Joint Dysfunction: A Randomized Clinical Trial
Background: Sacroiliac joint dysfunction frequently causes pain in low back. Localized tenderness and pain around the sacroiliac joint are signs. Objective: This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of mulligan mobilization Technique Versus McKenzie exercises among patients with sacroiliac joint Dysfunction. Methodology: Total 58 patients, with sacroiliac joint dysfunction were included who were fulfilled the eligibility criteria. This trial was registered in Iranian registry with ref#NCT05404451 Dated 01-08-2022. This study is assessor blind. We have used the convenient sampling technique and the Lottery Method was used to randomly select. Participants were then divided into the two groups at random. The researcher and participants were not informed of the allocation process. In envelopes, the allocation was concealed. Group A received treatment with mulligan mobilization technique while group B received treatment with McKenzie exercises. Both groups received treatment for four weeks. Using the VAS and the MODI scale, pain and disability were evaluated before and after treatment. Results: It was observed that McKenzie exercises were more effective than Mulligan mobilization techniques at reducing pain, disability, and enhancing sitting, standing, and walking in patients P value was (>0.005). While there was no significant difference has been observed in personal care lifting, sleeping, when comparing both groups P value was (>0.005). Conclusion: The McKenzie exercises are more efficient than Mulligan's Mobilization technique when the two groups are compared (at reducing pain, disability, and enhancing sitting, standing, and walking in patients).
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信