Use the Back button in your browser to see the other results of your search or to select another record.
Role of posterior-anterior vertebral mobilization versus thermotherapy in non specific lower back pain |
Baig AAM, Ahmed SI, Ali SS, Rahmani A, Siddiqui F |
Pakistan Journal of Medical Sciences 2018 Mar-Apr;34(2):435-439 |
clinical trial |
3/10 [Eligibility criteria: Yes; Random allocation: Yes; Concealed allocation: No; Baseline comparability: No; Blind subjects: No; Blind therapists: No; Blind assessors: No; Adequate follow-up: No; Intention-to-treat analysis: No; Between-group comparisons: Yes; Point estimates and variability: Yes. Note: Eligibility criteria item does not contribute to total score] *This score has been confirmed* |
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Low back pain (LBP) is the foremost cause to hamper an individual's functional activities in Pakistan. Its impact on the quality of life and work routine makes it a major reason for therapeutic consultations. About 90% of the cases with LBP are non-specific. Various options are available for the treatment of LBP. Posterior-anterior vertebral mobilization, a manual therapy technique; and thermotherapy are used in clinical practice, however evidence to gauge their relative efficacy is yet to be synthesised. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of posterior-anterior vertebral mobilization versus thermotherapy in the management of non-specific low back pain along with general stretching exercises. METHODS: A randomised controlled trial with two-group pretest-posttest design was conducted at IPMandR, Dow University of Health Sciences (DUHS). A total of 60 non-specific low back pain (NSLBP) patients with ages from 18 to 35 years were inducted through non-probability and purposive sampling technique. Baseline screening was done using an assessment form (appendix-I). Subjects were allocated into two groups through systematic random sampling. Group-A (experimental group) received posterior-anterior vertebral mobilization with general stretching exercises while group B (control group) received thermotherapy with general stretching exercises. Pain and functional disability were assessed using NPRS and RMDQ respectively. Pre and post treatment scores were documented. A maximum drop-out rate of 20% was assumed. Recorded data were entered into SPSS V-19. Frequency and percentages were calculated for categorical variables. Intragroup and intergroup analyses were done using Wilcoxon signed ranked test and Mann-Whitney test respectively. A p-value of 0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: Pre and post treatment analysis revealed that p-values for both pain and disability were less than 0.05, suggesting significant difference in NPRS and RMDQ scores. Whereas, median scores for both pain and disability were decreased by 75% in experimental group and 50% in control group. For inter group analysis p-values for both pain and disability were found to be less than 0.05. CONCLUSION: Both physiotherapeutic interventions, the PAVMs and thermotherapy, have significant effects on NSLBP in terms of relieving pain and improving functional disability. However PAVMs appeared to be more effective than thermotherapy.
|