...
首页> 外文期刊>The journal of orthopaedic and sports physical therapy >Short-term effects of kinesio taping versus cervical thrust manipulation in patients with mechanical neck pain: A randomized clinical trial
【24h】

Short-term effects of kinesio taping versus cervical thrust manipulation in patients with mechanical neck pain: A randomized clinical trial

机译:机械式拍打与颈椎推力操作对机械性颈痛患者的短期影响:一项随机临床试验

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

STUDY DESIGN: Randomized clinical trial. OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of cervical spine thrust manipulation to that of Kinesio Taping applied to the neck in individuals with mechanical neck pain, using self-reported pain and disability and cervical range of motion as measures. BACKGROUND: The effectiveness of cervical manipulation has received considerable attention in the literature. However, because some patients cannot tolerate cervical thrust manipulation, alternative therapeutic options should be investigated. METHODS: Eighty patients (36 women) were randomly assigned to 1 of 2 groups: the manipulation group, which received 2 cervical thrust manipulations, and the tape group, which received Kinesio Taping applied to the neck. Neck pain (11-point numeric pain rating scale), disability (Neck Disability Index), and cervical-range-of-motion data were collected at baseline and 1 week after the intervention by an assessor blinded to the treatment allocation of the patients. Mixed-model analyses of variance were used to examine the effects of the treatment on each outcome variable, with group as the between-subjects variable and time as the within-subjects variable. The primary analysis was the group-by-time interaction. RESULTS: No significant group-by-time interactions were found for pain (F = 1.892, P = .447) or disability (F = 0.115, P = .736). The group-by-time interaction was statistically significant for right (F = 7.317, P = .008) and left (F = 9.525, P = .003) cervical rotation range of motion, with the patients who received the cervical thrust manipulation having experienced greater improvement in cervical rotation than those treated with Kinesio Tape (P<.01). No significant group-by-time interactions were found for cervical spine range of motion for flexion (F = 0.944, P = .334), extension (F = 0.122, P = .728), and right (F = 0.220, P = .650) and left (F = 0.389, P = .535) lateral flexion. CONCLUSION: Patients with mechanical neck pain who received cervical thrust manipulation or Kinesio Taping exhibited similar reductions in neck pain intensity and disability and similar changes in active cervical range of motion, except for rotation. Changes in neck pain surpassed the minimal clinically important difference, whereas changes in disability did not. Changes in cervical range of motion were small and not clinically meaningful. Because we did not include a control or placebo group in this study, we cannot rule out a placebo effect or natural changes over time as potential reasons for the improvements measured in both groups.
机译:研究设计:随机临床试验。目的:以自我报告的疼痛和残疾以及颈椎活动范围为指标,比较颈椎推力操作与机械性颈痛患者颈部应用Kinesio Taping的效果。背景:颈椎手术的有效性在文献中已引起广泛关注。但是,由于某些患者无法忍受颈椎推力操作,因此应研究其他治疗选择。方法:将80例患者(36名女性)随机分为2组中的1组:接受2次颈椎推力操作的手法组,以及接受Kinesio Taping应用于颈部的胶带组。在基线和干预后1周,由对患者的治疗分配不知情的评估者收集颈部疼痛(11点数字疼痛评分量表),残疾(颈部残疾指数)和颈椎活动范围数据。使用方差的混合模型分析来检查治疗对每个结果变量的影响,其中组作为受试者间变量,而时间作为受试者内变量。主要分析是按时间分组的互动。结果:在疼痛(F = 1.892,P = .447)或残疾(F = 0.115,P = .736)方面,未发现明显的分组交互作用。右颈(F = 7.317,P = .008)和左颈(F = 9.525,P = .003)颈椎旋转运动范围的按组交互作用具有统计学意义,接受颈椎推力操纵的患者与使用Kinesio胶带治疗的患者相比,颈椎旋转的改善更大(P <.01)。颈椎屈曲运动范围(F = 0.944,P = .334),伸展运动(F = 0.122,P = .728)和右(F = 0.220,P = .650)和左(F = 0.389,P = .535)横向屈曲。结论:接受颈椎推力操作或Kinesio Taping治疗的机械性颈痛患者,除旋转以外,其颈痛强度和残疾降低程度相似,活动性颈椎活动范围也发生类似变化。颈部疼痛的变化超过了临床上最小的差异,而残疾的变化则没有。颈椎活动范围的变化很小,在临床上没有意义。因为我们没有在本研究中包括对照组或安慰剂组,所以我们不能排除安慰剂的作用或随时间的自然变化,这是两组中改善的潜在原因。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号