Effects of oscillatory mobilization as compared to sustained stretch mobilization in the management of cervical radiculopathy: A randomized controlled trial.
Activities of Daily Living
Adult
Aged
Cervical Vertebrae
/ physiopathology
Female
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
Musculoskeletal Manipulations
/ methods
Neck
/ physiopathology
Neck Pain
/ physiopathology
Pain Measurement
Physical Therapy Modalities
Radiculopathy
/ physiopathology
Range of Motion, Articular
/ physiology
Treatment Outcome
Cervical radiculopathy
kaltenborn
maitland
mobilization
neck pain
Journal
Journal of back and musculoskeletal rehabilitation
ISSN: 1878-6324
Titre abrégé: J Back Musculoskelet Rehabil
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 9201340
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2020
2020
Historique:
pubmed:
28
5
2019
medline:
18
8
2020
entrez:
26
5
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Cervical radiculopathy is a relatively common musculoskeletal disorder resulting in a significant social and occupational impact. Manual therapy is thought to provide relief in cervical radiculopathy; however, evidence is lacking regarding the comparison of different manual therapy concepts. To determine the effects of Maitland's oscillatory mobilization as compared to Kaltenborn's sustained stretch mobilization in the management of cervical radiculopathy. A randomized controlled trial was conducted at Fauji Foundation Hospital comprising of 46 patients randomized into oscillatory and sustained stretch mobilization groups. Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS), Neck Disability Index (NDI) and cervical range of motion (ROM) were used as outcome variables. No significant differences were observed at base line between the two groups (P> 0.05) except for ROM in extension and left side bending (P< 0.05). In terms of pre and post treatment comparison, P value of less than 0.05 was observed for both groups, indicating both treatments to be effective in isolation. However, post treatment comparison between both groups showed oscillatory mobilization to be superior to sustained stretch mobilization (P< 0.05) in the management of cervical radiculopathy except for the outcomes of pain and side bending. Both oscillatory and sustained stretch mobilization techniques are found to be effective in the management of cervical radiculopathy in terms of pain, range and disability. However, oscillatory mobilization is found to be superior in terms of functional ability and range of motion.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Cervical radiculopathy is a relatively common musculoskeletal disorder resulting in a significant social and occupational impact. Manual therapy is thought to provide relief in cervical radiculopathy; however, evidence is lacking regarding the comparison of different manual therapy concepts.
OBJECTIVE
OBJECTIVE
To determine the effects of Maitland's oscillatory mobilization as compared to Kaltenborn's sustained stretch mobilization in the management of cervical radiculopathy.
METHODS
METHODS
A randomized controlled trial was conducted at Fauji Foundation Hospital comprising of 46 patients randomized into oscillatory and sustained stretch mobilization groups. Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS), Neck Disability Index (NDI) and cervical range of motion (ROM) were used as outcome variables.
RESULTS
RESULTS
No significant differences were observed at base line between the two groups (P> 0.05) except for ROM in extension and left side bending (P< 0.05). In terms of pre and post treatment comparison, P value of less than 0.05 was observed for both groups, indicating both treatments to be effective in isolation. However, post treatment comparison between both groups showed oscillatory mobilization to be superior to sustained stretch mobilization (P< 0.05) in the management of cervical radiculopathy except for the outcomes of pain and side bending.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Both oscillatory and sustained stretch mobilization techniques are found to be effective in the management of cervical radiculopathy in terms of pain, range and disability. However, oscillatory mobilization is found to be superior in terms of functional ability and range of motion.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31127753
pii: BMR170914
doi: 10.3233/BMR-170914
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM