Ganesh G Shankar, Mohanty Patitapaban, Pattnaik Monalisa, Mishra Chittaranjan
Department of Physiotherapy, Swami Vivekanand National Institute of Rehabilitation Training and Research , Olatpur, Cuttack, Orissa , India.
Physiother Theory Pract. 2015 Feb;31(2):99-106. doi: 10.3109/09593985.2014.963904. Epub 2014 Sep 29.
While studies have looked into the effects of Maitland mobilization on symptom relief, to date, no work has specifically looked at the effects of Mulligan mobilization. The objective of this work was to compare the effectiveness of Maitland and Mulligan's mobilization and exercises on pain response, range of motion (ROM) and functional ability in patients with mechanical neck pain.
A total sample of 60 subjects (21-45 years of age) with complaints of insidious onset of mechanical pain that has lasted for less than 12 weeks and reduced ROM were randomly assigned to: group I - Maitland mobilization and exercises; group - II Mulligan mobilization and exercises; and group-III exercises only, and assessed for dependent variables by a blinded examiner.
Post measurement readings revealed statistical significance with time (p < 0.00) and no significance between groups (p > 0.05) indicating no group is superior to another after treatment and at follow-up. The effect sizes between the treatment groups were small.
Our results showed that manual therapy interventions were no better than supervised exercises in reducing pain, improving ROM and neck disability.
虽然已有研究探讨了梅特兰手法松动术对缓解症状的效果，但迄今为止，尚无研究专门考察 Mulligan 手法松动术的效果。本研究的目的是比较梅特兰手法松动术和 Mulligan 手法松动术及练习对机械性颈部疼痛患者疼痛反应、活动范围（ROM）和功能能力的有效性。
共有60名年龄在21至45岁之间、主诉隐匿性发作的机械性疼痛持续时间少于12周且ROM降低的受试者被随机分为：第一组——梅特兰手法松动术及练习；第二组——Mulligan 手法松动术及练习；第三组——仅进行练习，并由一名不知情的检查者对相关变量进行评估。
测量后读数显示，随时间有统计学意义（p < 0.00），但组间无统计学意义（p > 0.05），表明治疗后及随访时没有一组优于另一组。治疗组之间的效应量较小。
我们的结果表明，在减轻疼痛、改善ROM和颈部功能障碍方面，手法治疗干预并不优于有监督的练习。
