上胸椎活动与Ergon技术治疗机械性颈痛的比较

IF 0.4 Q4 SPORT SCIENCES
Hebatalla M. Said Zaghloul, Shahesta A. Osama Ghally, Mona M. Talaat Abdelkhalek, Marwa T. Mohamed, Lama Saad El-Din Mahmoud, Lamis A. Osama Ghaly
{"title":"上胸椎活动与Ergon技术治疗机械性颈痛的比较","authors":"Hebatalla M. Said Zaghloul, Shahesta A. Osama Ghally, Mona M. Talaat Abdelkhalek, Marwa T. Mohamed, Lama Saad El-Din Mahmoud, Lamis A. Osama Ghaly","doi":"10.6018/sportk.534471","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Upper thoracic spine mobilization and the Ergon technique are used to treat mechanical neck pain in order to speed recovery, promote tissue healing and improve range of motion. There have been a few studies discussing the Ergon IASTM and upper thoracic spine mobilization in patients with neck pain, but none compared the aforementioned techniques in the treatment of mechanical neck pain. This clinical trial was conducted on a sample of thirty participants (16 females and 14 males) with mechanical neck pain who were randomly divided into two groups: Upper Thoracic Spine Mobilization (n=15) and Ergon Technique (n=15). Twelve sessions were delivered to all participants over a four-week period, three days per week. Before and after treatment, pain severity was measured by Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS), cervical spine's active range of motion was measured by using a Cervical Range of Motion (CROM) device, and cervical spine's disability index was measured by Neck Disability Index (NDI). The statistical analysis was carried out using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 25. Both groups showed improvement in neck pain, reduced functional disability and increased cervical range of motion after treatment. The upper thoracic spine mobilization group had significantly better results in terms of cervical left lateral flexion and left rotation ranges of motion, while the Ergon Technique group had significantly better results in terms of improvement of neck pain and reduction in functional disability. In conclusion, the upper thoracic spine mobilization was effective at increasing the range of motion of the cervical region, while the Ergon technique was effective at relieving pain and dysfunction in the cervical spine in patients with mechanical neck pain.\n Upper thoracic spine mobilization and the Ergon technique are used to treat mechanical neck pain in order to speed recovery, promote tissue healing and improve range of motion. There have been a few studies discussing the Ergon IASTM and upper thoracic spine mobilization in patients with neck pain, but none compared the aforementioned techniques in the treatment of mechanical neck pain. This clinical trial was conducted on a sample of thirty participants (16 females and 14 males) with mechanical neck pain who were randomly divided into two groups: Upper Thoracic Spine Mobilization (n=15) and Ergon Technique (n=15). Twelve sessions were delivered to all participants over a four-week period, three days per week. Before and after treatment, pain severity was measured by Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS), cervical spine's active range of motion was measured by using a Cervical Range of Motion (CROM) device, and cervical spine's disability index was measured by Neck Disability Index (NDI). The statistical analysis was carried out using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 25. Both groups showed improvement in neck pain, reduced functional disability and increased cervical range of motion after treatment. The upper thoracic spine mobilization group had significantly better results in terms of cervical left lateral flexion and left rotation ranges of motion, while the Ergon Technique group had significantly better results in terms of improvement of neck pain and reduction in functional disability. In conclusion, the upper thoracic spine mobilization was effective at increasing the range of motion of the cervical region, while the Ergon technique was effective at relieving pain and dysfunction in the cervical spine in patients with mechanical neck pain.","PeriodicalId":44430,"journal":{"name":"Sport TK-Revista Euroamericana de Ciencias del Deporte","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison between upper thoracic spine mobilization and the Ergon technique in the treatment of mechanical neck pain\",\"authors\":\"Hebatalla M. Said Zaghloul, Shahesta A. Osama Ghally, Mona M. Talaat Abdelkhalek, Marwa T. Mohamed, Lama Saad El-Din Mahmoud, Lamis A. Osama Ghaly\",\"doi\":\"10.6018/sportk.534471\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Upper thoracic spine mobilization and the Ergon technique are used to treat mechanical neck pain in order to speed recovery, promote tissue healing and improve range of motion. There have been a few studies discussing the Ergon IASTM and upper thoracic spine mobilization in patients with neck pain, but none compared the aforementioned techniques in the treatment of mechanical neck pain. This clinical trial was conducted on a sample of thirty participants (16 females and 14 males) with mechanical neck pain who were randomly divided into two groups: Upper Thoracic Spine Mobilization (n=15) and Ergon Technique (n=15). Twelve sessions were delivered to all participants over a four-week period, three days per week. Before and after treatment, pain severity was measured by Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS), cervical spine's active range of motion was measured by using a Cervical Range of Motion (CROM) device, and cervical spine's disability index was measured by Neck Disability Index (NDI). The statistical analysis was carried out using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 25. Both groups showed improvement in neck pain, reduced functional disability and increased cervical range of motion after treatment. The upper thoracic spine mobilization group had significantly better results in terms of cervical left lateral flexion and left rotation ranges of motion, while the Ergon Technique group had significantly better results in terms of improvement of neck pain and reduction in functional disability. In conclusion, the upper thoracic spine mobilization was effective at increasing the range of motion of the cervical region, while the Ergon technique was effective at relieving pain and dysfunction in the cervical spine in patients with mechanical neck pain.\\n Upper thoracic spine mobilization and the Ergon technique are used to treat mechanical neck pain in order to speed recovery, promote tissue healing and improve range of motion. There have been a few studies discussing the Ergon IASTM and upper thoracic spine mobilization in patients with neck pain, but none compared the aforementioned techniques in the treatment of mechanical neck pain. This clinical trial was conducted on a sample of thirty participants (16 females and 14 males) with mechanical neck pain who were randomly divided into two groups: Upper Thoracic Spine Mobilization (n=15) and Ergon Technique (n=15). Twelve sessions were delivered to all participants over a four-week period, three days per week. Before and after treatment, pain severity was measured by Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS), cervical spine's active range of motion was measured by using a Cervical Range of Motion (CROM) device, and cervical spine's disability index was measured by Neck Disability Index (NDI). The statistical analysis was carried out using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 25. Both groups showed improvement in neck pain, reduced functional disability and increased cervical range of motion after treatment. The upper thoracic spine mobilization group had significantly better results in terms of cervical left lateral flexion and left rotation ranges of motion, while the Ergon Technique group had significantly better results in terms of improvement of neck pain and reduction in functional disability. In conclusion, the upper thoracic spine mobilization was effective at increasing the range of motion of the cervical region, while the Ergon technique was effective at relieving pain and dysfunction in the cervical spine in patients with mechanical neck pain.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44430,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Sport TK-Revista Euroamericana de Ciencias del Deporte\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-07-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Sport TK-Revista Euroamericana de Ciencias del Deporte\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.6018/sportk.534471\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"SPORT SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sport TK-Revista Euroamericana de Ciencias del Deporte","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.6018/sportk.534471","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"SPORT SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

上胸椎活动和Ergon技术用于治疗机械性颈部疼痛,以加速恢复,促进组织愈合和改善活动范围。有一些研究讨论了Ergon IASTM和上胸椎活动在颈痛患者中的应用,但没有研究比较上述技术在治疗机械性颈痛中的应用。本临床试验对30名患有机械性颈痛的参与者(16名女性和14名男性)进行了研究,他们随机分为两组:上胸椎动员组(n=15)和Ergon技术组(n=15)。在为期四周的时间里,所有参与者都参加了12次会议,每周三天。治疗前后采用数值疼痛评定量表(NPRS)测量疼痛严重程度,颈椎活动度测量仪(CROM)测量颈椎活动度,颈失能指数(NDI)测量颈椎失能指数。使用社会科学统计软件包(SPSS)第25版进行统计分析。两组治疗后均显示颈部疼痛改善,功能障碍减少,颈椎活动度增加。上胸椎活动组在颈椎左外侧屈曲和左旋活动范围方面有明显更好的结果,而Ergon技术组在颈部疼痛的改善和功能障碍的减少方面有明显更好的结果。综上所述,上胸椎活动可有效增加颈椎区域的活动范围,而Ergon技术可有效缓解机械性颈痛患者的颈椎疼痛和功能障碍。上胸椎活动和Ergon技术用于治疗机械性颈部疼痛,以加速恢复,促进组织愈合和改善活动范围。有一些研究讨论了Ergon IASTM和上胸椎活动在颈痛患者中的应用,但没有研究比较上述技术在治疗机械性颈痛中的应用。本临床试验对30名患有机械性颈痛的参与者(16名女性和14名男性)进行了研究,他们随机分为两组:上胸椎动员组(n=15)和Ergon技术组(n=15)。在为期四周的时间里,所有参与者都参加了12次会议,每周三天。治疗前后采用数值疼痛评定量表(NPRS)测量疼痛严重程度,颈椎活动度测量仪(CROM)测量颈椎活动度,颈失能指数(NDI)测量颈椎失能指数。使用社会科学统计软件包(SPSS)第25版进行统计分析。两组治疗后均显示颈部疼痛改善,功能障碍减少,颈椎活动度增加。上胸椎活动组在颈椎左外侧屈曲和左旋活动范围方面有明显更好的结果,而Ergon技术组在颈部疼痛的改善和功能障碍的减少方面有明显更好的结果。综上所述,上胸椎活动可有效增加颈椎区域的活动范围,而Ergon技术可有效缓解机械性颈痛患者的颈椎疼痛和功能障碍。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison between upper thoracic spine mobilization and the Ergon technique in the treatment of mechanical neck pain
Upper thoracic spine mobilization and the Ergon technique are used to treat mechanical neck pain in order to speed recovery, promote tissue healing and improve range of motion. There have been a few studies discussing the Ergon IASTM and upper thoracic spine mobilization in patients with neck pain, but none compared the aforementioned techniques in the treatment of mechanical neck pain. This clinical trial was conducted on a sample of thirty participants (16 females and 14 males) with mechanical neck pain who were randomly divided into two groups: Upper Thoracic Spine Mobilization (n=15) and Ergon Technique (n=15). Twelve sessions were delivered to all participants over a four-week period, three days per week. Before and after treatment, pain severity was measured by Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS), cervical spine's active range of motion was measured by using a Cervical Range of Motion (CROM) device, and cervical spine's disability index was measured by Neck Disability Index (NDI). The statistical analysis was carried out using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 25. Both groups showed improvement in neck pain, reduced functional disability and increased cervical range of motion after treatment. The upper thoracic spine mobilization group had significantly better results in terms of cervical left lateral flexion and left rotation ranges of motion, while the Ergon Technique group had significantly better results in terms of improvement of neck pain and reduction in functional disability. In conclusion, the upper thoracic spine mobilization was effective at increasing the range of motion of the cervical region, while the Ergon technique was effective at relieving pain and dysfunction in the cervical spine in patients with mechanical neck pain. Upper thoracic spine mobilization and the Ergon technique are used to treat mechanical neck pain in order to speed recovery, promote tissue healing and improve range of motion. There have been a few studies discussing the Ergon IASTM and upper thoracic spine mobilization in patients with neck pain, but none compared the aforementioned techniques in the treatment of mechanical neck pain. This clinical trial was conducted on a sample of thirty participants (16 females and 14 males) with mechanical neck pain who were randomly divided into two groups: Upper Thoracic Spine Mobilization (n=15) and Ergon Technique (n=15). Twelve sessions were delivered to all participants over a four-week period, three days per week. Before and after treatment, pain severity was measured by Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS), cervical spine's active range of motion was measured by using a Cervical Range of Motion (CROM) device, and cervical spine's disability index was measured by Neck Disability Index (NDI). The statistical analysis was carried out using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 25. Both groups showed improvement in neck pain, reduced functional disability and increased cervical range of motion after treatment. The upper thoracic spine mobilization group had significantly better results in terms of cervical left lateral flexion and left rotation ranges of motion, while the Ergon Technique group had significantly better results in terms of improvement of neck pain and reduction in functional disability. In conclusion, the upper thoracic spine mobilization was effective at increasing the range of motion of the cervical region, while the Ergon technique was effective at relieving pain and dysfunction in the cervical spine in patients with mechanical neck pain.
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
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
24 weeks
×
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