The effects of ischaemic compression vs integrated neurosmuscular inhibition technique on the gluteus medius muscle in the treatment of sacroiliac joint syndrome
- Authors: Nowak, Thomas
- Date: 2013-06-03
- Subjects: Gluteus medius , Sacroiliac joint diseases - Chiropractic treatment , Myofascial pain syndromes - Chiropractic treatment
- Type: Mini-Dissertation
- Identifier: uj:7574 , http://hdl.handle.net/10210/8437
- Description: M.Tech. (Chiropractic) , Objective: The purpose of the study was to determine the most effective way of treating Sacroiliac (SI) joint syndrome with associated Gluteus Medius muscle myofascial trigger points (MFTP) by using adjustive techniques performed on the SI joint with a soft tissue technique. The soft tissue techniques were either ischaemic compression (IC) vs integrated neuromuscular inhibition technique (INIT). Study Design: This was a randomised comparative trial. Setting: The participants were treated at the University of Johannesburg Chiropractic day clinic. Subjects: Thirty participants were randomly divided into two groups consisting of fifteen individuals each. There was a random selection of males and females which was not limited to any particular race or gender. Participants were limited to between the ages of 18 to 35 years of age. Participants diagnosed with SI joint syndrome and who had active Gluteus Medius myofascial trigger points were eligible for this study. Method: Subjective data was collected, by the participants completing an Oswestry low back pain and disability questionnaire and a Numerical pain rating scale (NPRS). The objective data readings involved assessing the range of motion of the hip joint, with a goniometer. Algometry readings of the most active Gluteus medius trigger point were taken, to measure the amount of force on the muscle trigger point before pain was felt. Each participant was seen seven times over the span of three weeks and underwent six treatments. Group 1 received ischemic compression to the Gluteus Medius trigger points followed by an adjustment to the predetermined restricted SI joint during visit 1-6. Group 2 received INIT to the Gluteus medius trigger points followed by an adjustment to the predetermined restricted SI joint during visits 1-6. Measurements were taken at visit 1, 4, and 7 before the treatment. Results: The results indicated that neither the IC group nor the INIT group showed statistically significant improvements when comparing the two treatment methods to each other. The comparison between the two techniques did however show clinical benefit in the subjective and objective readings throughout in the intra group analysis. It appears that that the ischemic compression had more clinical benefit in terms of subjective pain readings for the Oswestry low back pain and disability questionnaire and the NPRS. The INIT seemed to provide greater clinical improvement in terms of hip range of motion as it showed to be more beneficial in increasing hip adduction and abduction. Conclusion: The results of this study was that neither group had showed statistically significant improvements when comparing the two treatment methods to each other and therefore neither method exhibited superiority over the other according to the statistical analysis in the treatment of Gluteus Medius myofascial trigger points and SI joint syndrome.
- Full Text:
- Authors: Nowak, Thomas
- Date: 2013-06-03
- Subjects: Gluteus medius , Sacroiliac joint diseases - Chiropractic treatment , Myofascial pain syndromes - Chiropractic treatment
- Type: Mini-Dissertation
- Identifier: uj:7574 , http://hdl.handle.net/10210/8437
- Description: M.Tech. (Chiropractic) , Objective: The purpose of the study was to determine the most effective way of treating Sacroiliac (SI) joint syndrome with associated Gluteus Medius muscle myofascial trigger points (MFTP) by using adjustive techniques performed on the SI joint with a soft tissue technique. The soft tissue techniques were either ischaemic compression (IC) vs integrated neuromuscular inhibition technique (INIT). Study Design: This was a randomised comparative trial. Setting: The participants were treated at the University of Johannesburg Chiropractic day clinic. Subjects: Thirty participants were randomly divided into two groups consisting of fifteen individuals each. There was a random selection of males and females which was not limited to any particular race or gender. Participants were limited to between the ages of 18 to 35 years of age. Participants diagnosed with SI joint syndrome and who had active Gluteus Medius myofascial trigger points were eligible for this study. Method: Subjective data was collected, by the participants completing an Oswestry low back pain and disability questionnaire and a Numerical pain rating scale (NPRS). The objective data readings involved assessing the range of motion of the hip joint, with a goniometer. Algometry readings of the most active Gluteus medius trigger point were taken, to measure the amount of force on the muscle trigger point before pain was felt. Each participant was seen seven times over the span of three weeks and underwent six treatments. Group 1 received ischemic compression to the Gluteus Medius trigger points followed by an adjustment to the predetermined restricted SI joint during visit 1-6. Group 2 received INIT to the Gluteus medius trigger points followed by an adjustment to the predetermined restricted SI joint during visits 1-6. Measurements were taken at visit 1, 4, and 7 before the treatment. Results: The results indicated that neither the IC group nor the INIT group showed statistically significant improvements when comparing the two treatment methods to each other. The comparison between the two techniques did however show clinical benefit in the subjective and objective readings throughout in the intra group analysis. It appears that that the ischemic compression had more clinical benefit in terms of subjective pain readings for the Oswestry low back pain and disability questionnaire and the NPRS. The INIT seemed to provide greater clinical improvement in terms of hip range of motion as it showed to be more beneficial in increasing hip adduction and abduction. Conclusion: The results of this study was that neither group had showed statistically significant improvements when comparing the two treatment methods to each other and therefore neither method exhibited superiority over the other according to the statistical analysis in the treatment of Gluteus Medius myofascial trigger points and SI joint syndrome.
- Full Text:
The efficacy of interferential current therapy and chiropractic adjustments for the treatment of quadratus lumborum trigger points found in acute sacroiliac joint syndrome
- Authors: Von Hörsten, Marilize
- Date: 2012-07-19
- Subjects: Acute sacroiliac joint syndrome - Chiropractic treatment , Electrotherapeutics , Sacroiliac joint diseases - Chiropractic treatment
- Type: Mini-Dissertation
- Identifier: uj:8828 , http://hdl.handle.net/10210/5241
- Description: M.Tech. , Objectives: To investigate the effects of a combined therapeutic approach from the chiropractic perspective for the treatment of acute sacroiliac joint syndrome. Chiropractic adjustments combined with interferential current (IFC) therapy were compared to chiropractic adjustments alone. Methods: Consenting participants diagnosed with acute sacroiliac joint syndrome, were randomly assigned to receive a combination of chiropractic adjustments to the sacroiliac joint and IFC therapy directed to the ipsilateral quadratus lumborum (Group 1, n = 15), or chiropractic adjustments to the sacroiliac joints alone (Group 2, n = 15). Subjective and objective measurements were taken before treatment at the first and fourth consultations, as well as at the follow-up visit, within a period of three weeks. Subjective measurements consisted of the Numerical Pain Rating Scale and the Oswestry Disability Index. Objective measurements consisted of inclinometer readings for lumbar range of motion and algometer readings for the mechanical pain threshold of quadratus lumborum. Results: Mixed between-within subjects analysis of variance tests, with post hoc analyses, were performed for all measurements taken. Within-group results were statistically significant (p < 0.05) and between-group results were statistically non-significant (p > 0.05) for all measurements. The time between visit 1 and 4 was most effective for improved flexion in both Group 1 and Group 2. Results for the Numerical Pain Rating Scale as well as left and right rotation improved most significantly between visits 1 and 4 for Group 1, compared to visits 4 to 7 for Group 2. The period between visit 4 and 7 was most significant for improved scores in both groups for the Oswestry Disability Index, extension, left and right lateral flexion, and mechanical pressure pain thresholds for both the left and right quadratus lumborum muscles. Conclusions: There was no statistically significant difference between the effects of a combined treatment approach using chiropractic adjustments and interferential current therapy, and chiropractic adjustments alone. A combined therapeutic approach is therefore unlikely to add any clinical benefit to the chiropractic adjustment for the treatment of acute sacroiliac joint syndrome.
- Full Text:
- Authors: Von Hörsten, Marilize
- Date: 2012-07-19
- Subjects: Acute sacroiliac joint syndrome - Chiropractic treatment , Electrotherapeutics , Sacroiliac joint diseases - Chiropractic treatment
- Type: Mini-Dissertation
- Identifier: uj:8828 , http://hdl.handle.net/10210/5241
- Description: M.Tech. , Objectives: To investigate the effects of a combined therapeutic approach from the chiropractic perspective for the treatment of acute sacroiliac joint syndrome. Chiropractic adjustments combined with interferential current (IFC) therapy were compared to chiropractic adjustments alone. Methods: Consenting participants diagnosed with acute sacroiliac joint syndrome, were randomly assigned to receive a combination of chiropractic adjustments to the sacroiliac joint and IFC therapy directed to the ipsilateral quadratus lumborum (Group 1, n = 15), or chiropractic adjustments to the sacroiliac joints alone (Group 2, n = 15). Subjective and objective measurements were taken before treatment at the first and fourth consultations, as well as at the follow-up visit, within a period of three weeks. Subjective measurements consisted of the Numerical Pain Rating Scale and the Oswestry Disability Index. Objective measurements consisted of inclinometer readings for lumbar range of motion and algometer readings for the mechanical pain threshold of quadratus lumborum. Results: Mixed between-within subjects analysis of variance tests, with post hoc analyses, were performed for all measurements taken. Within-group results were statistically significant (p < 0.05) and between-group results were statistically non-significant (p > 0.05) for all measurements. The time between visit 1 and 4 was most effective for improved flexion in both Group 1 and Group 2. Results for the Numerical Pain Rating Scale as well as left and right rotation improved most significantly between visits 1 and 4 for Group 1, compared to visits 4 to 7 for Group 2. The period between visit 4 and 7 was most significant for improved scores in both groups for the Oswestry Disability Index, extension, left and right lateral flexion, and mechanical pressure pain thresholds for both the left and right quadratus lumborum muscles. Conclusions: There was no statistically significant difference between the effects of a combined treatment approach using chiropractic adjustments and interferential current therapy, and chiropractic adjustments alone. A combined therapeutic approach is therefore unlikely to add any clinical benefit to the chiropractic adjustment for the treatment of acute sacroiliac joint syndrome.
- Full Text:
- «
- ‹
- 1
- ›
- »