Upper cervical spine mobilization demonstrated more clinical benefits than massage therapy with regard to headache pain parameters and neck mobility for CGH subjects.
Introduction: Osteoarthritis (OA) is a common degenerative joint disease particularly in older subjects. It is usually associated with pain, restricted range of motion, muscle weakness, difficulties in daily living activities and impaired quality of life. To determine the effects of adding two different intensities of low-level laser therapy (LLLT) to exercise training program on pain severity, joint stiffness, physical function, isometric muscle strength, range of motion of the knee, and quality of life in older subjects with knee OA. Methods: Patients were randomly assigned into three groups. They received 16 sessions, 2 sessions/week for 8 weeks. Group-I: 18 patients were treated with a laser dose of 6 J/cm 2 with a total dose of 48 J. Group-II: 18 patients were treated with a laser dose of 3 J/cm 2 with a total dose of 27 J. Group-III: 15 patients were treated with laser without emission as a placebo. All patients received same exercise training program including stretching and strengthening exercises. Patients were evaluated before and after intervention by visual analogue scale (VAS), the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis (WOMAC) index for quality of life, handheld dynamometer and universal goniometer. Results: T test revealed that there was a significant reduction in VAS and pain intensity, an increase in isometric muscle strength and range of motion of the knee as well as increase in physical functional ability in three treatment groups. Also analysis of variance (ANOVA) proved significant differences among them and the post hoc tests (LSD) test showed the best improvements for patients of the first group. Conclusion: It can be concluded that addition of LLLT to exercise training program is more effective than exercise training alone in the treatment of older patients with chronic knee OA and the rate of improvement may be dose dependent, as with 6 J/cm 2 or 3 J/cm 2 .
Background:Osteoporosis is a major public health problem affecting the elderly population, particularly women. The objective of the study was to evaluate the effects of adding weight-bearing exercise as opposed to nonweight-bearing programs to the medical treatment of bone mineral density (BMD) and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of elderly patients with osteoporosis.Materials and Methods:Participating in the study were 40 elderly osteoporotic patients (27 females and 13 males), with ages ranging from 60 to 67 years, who were receiving medical treatment for osteoporosis. They were assigned randomly into two groups: Group-I: Twenty patients practiced weight-bearing exercises. Group-II: Twenty patients did nonweight-bearing exercises. All patients trained for 45-60 min/session, two sessions/week for 6 months. BMD of the lumbar spine, right neck of femur, and right distal radial head of all patients were measured by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry before and after both treatment programs. In addition, the QoL was measured by means of the HRQoL “ECOS-16” questionnaire.Results:T-tests proved that mean values of BMD of the lumbar spine, right neck of femur and right distal radial head were significantly increased in both groups with greater improvement in the weight-bearing group. The QoL was significantly improved in both groups, but the difference between them was not significant.Conclusion:Addition of weight-bearing exercise program to medical treatment increases BMD more than nonweight-bearing exercise in elderly subjects with osteoporosis. Furthermore, both weight-bearing and nonweight-bearing exercise programs significantly improved the QoL of patients with osteoporosis.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.