2
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Controlled intervention to compare the efficacies of manual pressure release and the muscle energy technique for treating mechanical neck pain due to upper trapezius trigger points

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Purpose

          This study aimed at comparing the clinical efficacies of two manual therapies to determine the most beneficial result-oriented physiotherapeutic approach for treating nonspecific neck pain due to myofascial trigger points (MTrPs).

          Methods

          This was a randomized, controlled pretest–posttest experimental study that compared manual pressure release (MPR), the muscle energy technique (MET), and a control condition. These techniques were compared using a convenience sample of 45 female participants with neck pain due to MTrPs (mean age±SD=21.49±3.66; age range=18–30 years). The visual analog scale, pressure pain threshold, Neck Disability Index Questionnaire, and a standardized measuring tape were used to assess the participants’ neck pain, muscle tenderness, functional disability due to neck pain, and range of neck rotation, respectively, at baseline (day 0), day 1, and day 5 postintervention and at days 10 and 15 during follow-up. All groups were given postural advice and at-home neck exercises. Repeated-measures ANOVA and one-way ANOVA were used to analyze the data.

          Results

          The within-group analyses showed significant improvement ( P<0.05) in all outcome measures at days 1 and 5 postintervention and at days 10 and 15 during the follow-up for all groups. The between-group analyses confirmed nonsignificant differences ( P>0.05) between all groups for all variables.

          Conclusion

          MPR and the MET are equally effective for reducing pain and muscle tenderness and for improving neck disability and range of rotation in patients with nonspecific neck pain. Furthermore, advice promoting postural correction can be an adjunct to physiotherapeutic interventions for reducing neck pain and its symptoms. A combination of these manual therapies with postural advice might be a good treatment option for nonspecific pain in physiotherapy clinics.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 38

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Cost-of-illness of neck pain in The Netherlands in 1996.

          The prevalence of neck pain in the general population ranges from 10 to 15%. The complaints can result in substantial medical consumption, absenteeism from work and disability. In this study we investigated the costs of neck pain in the Netherlands in 1996 to assess the financial burden to society. The study was based on prevalence data. Data sources included national registries, reports of research institutes and health care authorities. Direct health care costs were estimated for hospital care, general practice care and paramedical care. These costs were calculated using fees. Calculation of indirect costs (absenteeism and disability) was based on the Human Capital Method (HCM). As an alternative approach the Friction Cost Method (FCM) was used. The total cost of neck pain in The Netherlands in 1996 was estimated to be US $686 million. The share of these costs was about 1% of total health care expenditures and 0.1 % of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in 1996. Direct costs were $160 million (23%). Paramedical care accounted for largest proportion of direct costs (84%). When applying the HCM for calculating indirect costs, these costs amounted to $527 million (77%). The total number of sick days related to neck pain were estimated to be 1.4 million with a total cost of $185.4 million in 1996. Disability for neck pain accounted for the largest proportion (50%) of the total costs related to neck pain in 1996 ($341). When applying the FCM for calculating the indirect costs, these costs were reduced to $96 million. The costs related to neck pain in 1996 in The Netherlands were substantial. Some caution should be taken in interpretation, as a number of assumptions had to be made in order to estimate the total costs. The cost structure shown in this study, with high indirect costs, has also been found in other studies. From an economical point of view it seems to be important to prevent patients from having to take sick leave and disability. One way in achieving this goal is to develop and investigate more effective treatments for acute neck pain, in order to prevent patients developing chronic pain and disability. Another option is to protect chronic patients from sick leave and disability by careful management. Thus, also in the area of direct medical costs, there may be room for cost savings by stimulating and improving cost-efficiency and cost-effectiveness of the (para)medical care. In order to deal with the lack of specific disease information, more detailed information of medical consumption, sick leave and disability is required for future cost analysis.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Active neck muscle training in the treatment of chronic neck pain in women: a randomized controlled trial.

            Active physical training is commonly recommended for patients with chronic neck pain; however, its efficacy has not been demonstrated in randomized studies. To evaluate the efficacy of intensive isometric neck strength training and lighter endurance training of neck muscles on pain and disability in women with chronic, nonspecific neck pain. Examiner-blinded randomized controlled trial conducted between February 2000 and March 2002. Participants were recruited from occupational health care systems in southern and eastern Finland. A total of 180 female office workers between the ages of 25 and 53 years with chronic, nonspecific neck pain. Patients were randomly assigned to either 2 training groups or to a control group, with 60 patients in each group. The endurance training group performed dynamic neck exercises, which included lifting the head up from the supine and prone positions. The strength training group performed high-intensity isometric neck strengthening and stabilization exercises with an elastic band. Both training groups performed dynamic exercises for the shoulders and upper extremities with dumbbells. All groups were advised to do aerobic and stretching exercises regularly 3 times a week. Neck pain and disability were assessed by a visual analog scale, the neck and shoulder pain and disability index, and the Vernon neck disability index. Intermediate outcome measures included mood assessed by a short depression inventory and by maximal isometric neck strength and range of motion measures. At the 12-month follow-up visit, both neck pain and disability had decreased in both training groups compared with the control group (P<.001). Maximal isometric neck strength had improved flexion by 110%, rotation by 76%, and extension by 69% in the strength training group. The respective improvements in the endurance training group were 28%, 29%, and 16% and in the control group were 10%, 10%, and 7%. Range of motion had also improved statistically significantly in both training groups compared with the control group in rotation, but only the strength training group had statistically significant improvements in lateral flexion and in flexion and extension. Both strength and endurance training for 12 months were effective methods for decreasing pain and disability in women with chronic, nonspecific neck pain. Stretching and fitness training are commonly advised for patients with chronic neck pain, but stretching and aerobic exercising alone proved to be a much less effective form of training than strength training.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Prevalence, determinants, and consequences of chronic neck pain in Finland.

              Chronic neck pain is a relatively mild musculoskeletal condition, but common enough to be a possible public health problem. The distribution, determinants, and consequences of chronic neck pain have hitherto been described inadequately. In the Mini-Finland Health Survey, a representative population sample of 8,000 Finns aged greater than or equal to 30 years was invited to participate in a comprehensive health examination comprising an interview and a clinical examination; 90.2% complied. Predetermined criteria were used to diagnose major cardiovascular, musculoskeletal, respiratory, mental, and other disorders, regardless of other simultaneous disorders. Chronic neck syndrome was diagnosed in 9.5% of the men and 13.5% of the women. When adjusted for age and sex, the prevalence of the neck syndrome was associated with a history of injury to the back, neck, or shoulder and with mental and physical stress at work. Among those aged 30 to 64 years, overweight and parity were also significant determinants. Other musculoskeletal and mental disorders were associated with neck syndrome, and the association persisted after working conditions, injuries, overweight, and parity were adjusted for. There was some independent association between neck syndrome and disabilities, use of physician services, and use of pain killers.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                J Pain Res
                J Pain Res
                Journal of Pain Research
                Journal of Pain Research
                Dove Medical Press
                1178-7090
                2018
                12 December 2018
                : 11
                : 3151-3160
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Physiotherapy, Prakash Institute of Physiotherapy Rehabilitation and Allied Medical Sciences, Chaudhary Charan Singh University (Meerut), Uttar Pradesh, India
                [2 ]Rehabilitation Research Chair, College of Applied Medical Sciences, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, ajamaluddin@ 123456ksu.edu.sa
                Author notes
                Correspondence: Amir Iqbal, G95-1, Rehabilitation Research Chair, College of Applied Medical Sciences, King Saud University, PO Box 10219, Riyadh 11433, Saudi Arabia, Tel +9661 46 96 010, Fax +9661 46 93 589, Email ajamaluddin@ 123456ksu.edu.sa
                Article
                jpr-11-3151
                10.2147/JPR.S172711
                6296190
                © 2018 Kashyap et al. This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited

                The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed.

                Categories
                Original Research

                Anesthesiology & Pain management

                muscle energy technique, manual pressure release, neck pain

                Comments

                Comment on this article