Khan Rehan Ramzan, Awan Waqar Ahmad, Rashid Sajid, Masood Tahir
Dr. Rehan Ramzan Khan, DPT. Multan College of Physiotherapy, Multan Medical & Dental College, Multan, Pakistan.
Dr. Waqar Ahmad Awan, DPT. Isra institute of Rehabilitation Sciences, Isra University, Islamabad, Pakistan.
Pak J Med Sci. 2017 Nov-Dec;33(6):1333-1338. doi: 10.12669/pjms.336.13851.
To compare the effectiveness of intermittent cervical Traction in sitting vs. supine position for the management of cervical radiculopathy.
A randomized clinical trial was done to compare pain and disability modification of cervical radiculopathy patients by using cervical traction in sitting and supine positions. Forty patients (males and females aged between 18-60 years with chronic cervical radiculopathy) were recruited for the trial. Participants were randomized into two homogeneous groups by dice method. The Group-A (n=20) received 3-weeks of intermittent cervical traction in sitting position along with Transcutaneous Electric Nerve Stimulation (TENS) and hot pack. The Group-B (n=20) received the same treatment except the intermittent cervical traction that was applied in supine position. Participants were assessed two times: at baseline (week 0) and at the termination of rehabilitation (week 3). Neck disability index was used to collect the data before and after the treatment.
The mean age of the patients was 43.15±8.99 vs. 48.80±6.89 years in Group-A vs. Group-B respectively. Mean (±S.D.) weight of the patients was 74.75±12.11 vs. 74.60±11.24 kg in Group-A vs. Group-B respectively. Mean Neck Disability Index score at start of treatment was 30.30±7.46 vs. 30.75±7.85 in Group-A and Group-B respectively. There was a significant difference in Group-A and Group-B regarding aggregate NDI score at the end of treatment (19.45±7.12 vs. 11.05±4.40; p<0.0001).
Supine position is better choice for applying cervical traction as compared to sitting position for the management of cervical radiculopathy comparing post interventional NDI score.
比较坐位与仰卧位间歇性颈椎牵引治疗神经根型颈椎病的效果。
进行一项随机临床试验,比较坐位和仰卧位颈椎牵引对神经根型颈椎病患者疼痛和功能障碍的改善情况。招募了40例患者(年龄在18至60岁之间的慢性神经根型颈椎病男性和女性)参与试验。通过掷骰子法将参与者随机分为两个同质组。A组(n = 20)接受为期3周的坐位间歇性颈椎牵引,同时进行经皮电神经刺激(TENS)和热敷。B组(n = 20)接受相同的治疗,但间歇性颈椎牵引采用仰卧位。对参与者进行两次评估:基线时(第0周)和康复结束时(第3周)。使用颈部功能障碍指数收集治疗前后的数据。
A组患者的平均年龄为43.15±8.99岁,B组为48.80±6.89岁。A组患者的平均体重(±标准差)为74.75±12.11 kg,B组为74.60±11.24 kg。治疗开始时,A组和B组的平均颈部功能障碍指数评分分别为30.30±7.46和30.75±7.85。治疗结束时,A组和B组的总颈部功能障碍指数评分存在显著差异(19.45±7.12对11.05±4.40;p<0.0001)。
与坐位相比,仰卧位是应用颈椎牵引治疗神经根型颈椎病的更好选择,比较干预后的颈部功能障碍指数评分可知。