Foundation University College of Physical Therapy (FUCP), Foundation University Islamabad, Islamabad, Pakistan.
Brainstorm Research (brainstormresearch.org), Islamabad, Pakistan.
J Back Musculoskelet Rehabil. 2024;37(1):37-46. doi: 10.3233/BMR-210293.
Muscle energy technique (MET) is found to be effective for the management of neck pain and in addition to the muscle specific approach, clinicians may also adopt movement specific approach for METs. However, the literature is deficient in terms of comparison of muscle specific and movement specific METs in the management of mechanical neck pain.
To compare the effects of muscle specific and movement specific METs in the management of mechanical neck pain.
A single blind parallel design randomized controlled trial was conducted on 66 participants with mechanical neck pain ranging from 40-80 mm on visual analogue scale (VAS), aged between 19-44 years with pain and limitation on cervical motion. Once included, the participants were randomly allocated to two groups, namely the muscle specific MET group and the movement specific MET group. Outcome measures included VAS, Neck Disability Index (NDI) and cervical range of motion (ROM).
No significant differences (p> 0.05) were observed, neither immediately nor after 5 days, between muscle specific and movement specific MET in terms of VAS, NDI and ROM. However, a significant difference (p< 0.05) was observed in both groups in terms of pre- and post-analysis for all outcome variables.
Both muscle specific and movement specific METs are effective in the management of mechanical neck pain, with no significant differences between the two treatment techniques.
肌肉能量技术(MET)被发现对管理颈部疼痛有效,除了肌肉特异性方法外,临床医生还可以采用运动特异性方法进行 MET。然而,在机械性颈部疼痛的管理中,肌肉特异性和运动特异性 MET 的比较方面,文献仍然不足。
比较肌肉特异性和运动特异性 MET 在机械性颈部疼痛管理中的效果。
对 66 名机械性颈部疼痛患者(视觉模拟评分 [VAS] 为 40-80 毫米,年龄在 19-44 岁之间,伴有颈部运动疼痛和受限)进行了一项单盲平行设计随机对照试验。一旦纳入,参与者被随机分配到两组,即肌肉特异性 MET 组和运动特异性 MET 组。结果测量包括 VAS、颈部残疾指数(NDI)和颈椎活动范围(ROM)。
肌肉特异性和运动特异性 MET 在 VAS、NDI 和 ROM 方面,无论是即刻还是 5 天后,都没有观察到显著差异(p>0.05)。然而,两组在所有结果变量的前后分析中都观察到了显著差异(p<0.05)。
肌肉特异性和运动特异性 MET 均对机械性颈部疼痛的管理有效,两种治疗技术之间没有显著差异。