Efficiency of Muscle Energy Techniques

Key requirements

Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.

• Ages 30 to 45 years
• Women only
• No healthy volunteers
• Adult

Trial locations and contacts

1 site in 1 country.

About this study

Official title: Efficiency of Muscle Energy Techniques In Female Patients Mechanical Lower Pain: A Randomised Control Trial A Randomised Control Trial

Conditions

Mechanical Low Back Pain

Being tested

Muscle Energy Technique, conventional physical therapy and rehabilitation

Keywords

Efficiency, Mechanical Low Back Pain, Muscle Energy Techniques

Medical subject headings

Low Back Pain

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

• Muscle Energy TechniqueOther

  The Janda method (Post isometric relaxation PIR Technique), one of the Muscle Energy Techniques, was used on m.piriformis, m.quadratus lumborum, m.hamstring, m.psoas major muscles in the study group. First, the dysfunctional muscle was stretched passively by the physiotherapist up to the movement barrier, and 5-7 seconds of isometric muscle contraction in the opposite direction was requested from the patient at the barrier. This practice was continued until muscle tension or joint dysfunction disappeared.

  All participants performed standard home exercises consisting of stretching and strengthening. These exercises were taught to the participants by the physiotherapist in the first treatment session, and when they came to each treatment session, it was questioned whether they did it or not, and a control chart was created for exercise follow-up.

• conventional physical therapy and rehabilitationOther

  In the content of conventional physiotherapy program for both groups; Hot Pack (20 min), Ultrasound (ITO brand 1 MHz and 1.5 W/cm2, 5 min), Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation (TENS, 50-100 Hz, 20 min) and standard home exercises were included. The program went 5 times a week, 10 consecutive sessions. Each session lasted an average of 45 minutes.

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

1. Pain Assessment

   The pain severity felt by the participants in the lumbal region was evaluated with the Visual Analog Scale (VAS). VAS is the most appropriate tool for defining pain severity or intensity with its simplicity, reliability and validity as well as ratio scale features (Yakut and Kayıhan 2002). The VAS is a 10cm horizontal scale with 0 as "no pain" and 10 "very severe pain". The participant was asked to mark the severity of low back pain on the line. The marked point was measured and recorded.

   Measured: 8 week

2. Modified Shober Test

   The participant's sacrum bases were combined with a line, the central point of this line was marked, 10 cm above and 5 cm below the central line were marked, and the participants were asked to bend fully forward without bending their knees. If the difference in this distance is less than 5 cm, the measurement was accepted as a decrease in spinal mobility (Tousignant 2005).

   Measured: 8 week

3. Fingertip-Ground Distance

   In this test, the participant measures 15 cm. height, while standing upright on a block, he was asked to bend forward without bending his knees, and the fingertip-to-floor distance was measured with a tape measure (İnanoğlu and Baltacı 2014).

   Measured: 8 week

4. Lumbal Lateral Flexion Distance

   It was started with the participant's feet shoulder-width apart, while standing upright, arms parallel to each other and at the side of the trunk. The place of the distal end of the middle finger of the right and left hand of the participant on the thigh was marked, and he was asked to tilt his body to the side by sliding his hand down on the thigh. The end point was marked again and the distance between the Right and Left LuMLBPr Lateral Flexion Distance and the ground was measured with a tape measure and the value found was recorded in centimeters (İnanoğlu and Baltacı 2014).

   Measured: 8 week

5. Tampa Kinesiophobia Scale

   It was used to evaluate the fear avoidance levels (kinesiophobia) of the participants. This scale, which is used in acute and chronic low back pain, fibromyalgia and musculoskeletal injuries and whiplash-related diseases, consists of 17 questions and a 4-point Likert score (1 = strongly disagree, 4 = completely agree) is used. Items 4, 8, 12, and 16 are reverse-scored, and the high score of the participant in the scale, which is calculated with a total score of 17-68, indicates that kinesiophobia is also high (Yılmaz 2011).

   Measured: 8 week

6. Oswestry Disability Index

   It was used to evaluate the disability level. The Turkish validity and reliability of this index was done by Yakut et al. (Yakut 2004). In the anMET, which questions the disability status in activities of daily living (pain severity, personal care, lifting, walking, sitting, standing, sleeping, social life, travel, and the degree of change in pain), with an index consisting of 10 items, those who score 0-14 score mild, 15- Those with a score of 29 were considered to have moderate disability, and those with a score above 30 were considered to have advanced disability (Fairbank 2000).

   Measured: 8 week

7. Nottingham Health Profile

   The Turkish version of Küçükdeveci et al. was used to evaluate the health-related quality of life of the participants and to measure the extent to which the health problems perceived by the individual affect normal daily activities. In the questionnaire, which evaluates health status in 6 dimensions with 38 items, energy (3 items), pain (8 items), emotional reactions (9 items), sleep (5 items), social isolation (5 items) and consists of physical activity (8 items). When the scores obtained from the sub-scores for the total NSP score approach from 0 to 100, it is accepted that the quality of life decreases (Küçükdeveci 2000).

   Measured: 8 week

8. Beck Depression Inventory

   This questionnaire, the Turkish validity and reliability of which was conducted by Hisli et al. in 1988, was used to evaluate the depressive symptoms of the participants. Somatic, cognitive, motivational and emotional symptoms are scored with a total of 21 items. An increase in the total scores of the participants indicates an increase in their depressive symptoms (Beck et al. 1961). In our study, analysis was performed using the total scores of the scale.

   Measured: 8 week

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

1. First posted10 Oct 2022
2. Study start10 Feb 2017
3. Primary completion10 Jan 2018
4. Study completion10 Feb 2018

Resources

• Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
• Publications (2)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
• Other trials for Mechanical Low Back PainStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
• What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.

More details

For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.