Home|Journals|Articles by Year Follow on Twitter

Directory for Medical Articles
 

Open Access

Original Research

IJHRS. 2012; 1(1): 16-24


Comparative Effectiveness of Muscle Energy Technique and Static Stretching for Treatment of Subacute Mechanical Neck Pain

Richa Mahajan, Chitra Kataria, Kshitija Bansal.

Cited by (1)

Abstract
Background: Neck pain is a common problem within our society. Upper trapezius and the levator scapulae are the most common postural muscles that tends to get shorten leading to restricted neck mobility. If these group of muscles are treated it may provide with best results. There is lack of evidence to allow conclusions to be drawn about the effectiveness of Muscle energy technique (MET) when compared with stretching exercises for relieving mechanical neck pain. It would be interesting to study if these two techniques yield comparable outcomes and if one technique is superior to the next which should be the alternate choice of therapy
.
Objective: To evaluate the comparative effectiveness of Muscle energy technique and static stretching on pain and active cervical range of motion (ROM) in subacute mechanical neck pain

Subjects and methods: 45 patients with subacute mechanical neck pain were randomly assigned to receive Muscle Energy Technique plus conventional physiotherapy (group 1, n = 15), static stretching plus conventional exercise program (group 2, n = 15) and conventional physiotherapy only (group 3, n = 15).

Intervention: Group 1 received 6 sessions of Muscle Energy Technique and 10 sessions of conventional physiotherapy. Group 2 received 6 sessions of static stretching and 10 sessions of conventional physiotherapy. Group 3 received 10 sessions of conventional physiotherapy. All groups were treated for 2 weeks.

Outcome measures: Pain intensity on 100mm VAS, active cervical lateral flexion range of motion, active cervical rotation range of motion.

Results: Paired t-test was used for within group analysis. ANOVA followed by post hoc analysis was employed for between group comparisons. No significant difference was found in any of the outcome measure between MET and static stretching groups (p > 0.05) while both were found to be significantly better than the conventional exercise group (p < 0.05) between the 3 groups. Statistically significant improvements were found in all the 3 groups for all the outcome measures (p < 0.05).

Conclusion: This study concluded that both the treatment techniques, muscle energy technique and static stretching were effective in alleviating the mechanical neck pain in terms of decreasing pain intensity and increasing active cervical range of motion as there was no significant difference between the two groups, however MET was superior than static stretching in decreasing pain intensity and increasing active cervical range of motion.

Key words: Mechanical neck pain, Muscle energy technique, Static stretching



Similar Articles

Effects of electroacupuncture on pain sensation in a rat model of hyperalgesia with nicotine dependence.
Wang SJ, Zhang YP, Candiotti KA
Neural regeneration research. 2022; 17(4): 905-910

Surface-based map plasticity of brain regions related to sensory motor and pain information processing after osteonecrosis of the femoral head.
Ma J, Hua XY, Zheng MX, Wu JJ, Huo BB, Xing XX, Feng SY, Li B, Xu JG
Neural regeneration research. 2022; 17(4): 806-811

Three-dimensional models of neuromuscular tissue.
Raffa P, Easler M, Urciuolo A
Neural regeneration research. 2022; 17(4): 759-766

GDNF to the rescue: GDNF delivery effects on motor neurons and nerves, and muscle re-innervation after peripheral nerve injuries.
Cintron-Colon AF, Almeida-Alves G, VanGyseghem JM, Spitsbergen JM
Neural regeneration research. 2022; 17(4): 748-753

In Silico Analysis of Peptide Macrocycle -Protein Interactions.
Hurley MM, Small MC
Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.). 2022; 2371(): 317-334


Full-text options


Latest Statistics about COVID-19
• pubstat.org


Add your Article(s) to Indexes
• citeindex.org






Covid-19 Trends and Statistics
ScopeMed.com
CiteIndex.org
CancerLine
FoodsLine
PhytoMedline
Follow ScopeMed on Twitter
Author Tools
eJPort Journal Hosting
About BiblioMed
License Information
Terms & Conditions
Privacy Policy
Contact Us

The articles in Bibliomed are open access articles licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/) which permits unrestricted, non-commercial use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the work is properly cited.
ScopeMed is a Database Service for Scientific Publications. Copyright ScopeMed Information Services.



ScopeMed Web Sites