Use the Back button in your browser to see the other results of your search or to select another record.

Detailed Search Results

Relative therapeutic efficacy of the Williams and McKenzie protocols in back pain management
Nwuga G, Nwuga V
Physiotherapy Practice 1985;1(2):99-105
clinical trial
4/10 [Eligibility criteria: Yes; Random allocation: No; Concealed allocation: No; Baseline comparability: Yes; Blind subjects: No; Blind therapists: No; Blind assessors: Yes; 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*

A study was conducted to compare the relative efficacy of the Williams protocol for low back pain management with the McKenzie protocol using patients with diagnosis of prolapsed intervertebral disc. There were two groups in this study. There were the Williams group (WG) and the McKenzie group (MG). There were 31 subjects in each group. The results of this study showed that the McKenzie protocol was superior to the Williams protocol when post-treatment ranges, movement and straight-leg-raising were considered; average time spent in treating patients with the McKenzie protocol was significantly less than that spent with the Williams protocol; the McKenzie protocol was significantly better than that of the Williams in decreasing pain and increasing comfortable sitting time; more of the Williams protocol patents come back for more treatment as a result of relapses as compared to the McKenzie protocol patients. It was concluded that the McKenzie protocol was superior to the Williams protocol in the treatment of the type of patients described in the study.

Full text (sometimes free) may be available at these link(s):      help