Background: Myofascial Pain Syndrome is a condition causing pain at myofascial trigger points. Kinesio Taping has been widely used to decrease pain and improve range of motion. Objective: The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the effectiveness of therapeutic programs that include kinesio taping on reducing myofascial pain syndrome symptoms. Methods: Independent research was performed for legit studies using the following electronic databases: PubMed, CINAHL, MEDLINE, SPORT Discus, EM base, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, from February 2017 to March 2017. The keywords were "keniso tape myofascial" AND "taping myofascial" AND "myofascial pain Syndrome" AND "myofascial trigger points." The research resulted in 5,793 articles that eventually included 6 articles that had met the inclusion and exclusion criteria, and the data extracted data from the articles was about the pain severity, and was measured by Visual Analog Scale (VAS). Results: The collected data was pooled from the results of 256 subjects (199 females and 57 males). Using KT showed improvement but not significant statistically in three of the analyzed studies, and the remaining three studies showed a statistical significant reduction in VAS score. The overall P value that computed by the European Scientific Journal February 2018 edition Vol.14, No.6 ISSN: 1857 -7881 (Print) e -ISSN 1857-7431 337 Comprehensive Meta-Analysis 2.0 software was statistically significant (P value= 0.001) between the KT group and the control group. Conclusion: This systematic review and meta-analysis was performed on six studies in regarding to the efficacy of KT on the myofascial pain in the upper trapezius muscle. The meta-analysis suggests KT with other therapeutic protocols to treat myofascial pain syndrome and increase cervical range of motion as well as the functional activities.

Clinical investigation has revealed that individuals face challenges in adapting to their gruesome employee-roles after undergoing a back intervention program. The aim of this research was to investigate the back-rehabilitated patient's perspectives and understandings of the diffi culties faced while adapting as employees. Research aimed to extract the patient's perspectives and understandings of barriers, facilitators and adaptive procedures which infl uenced their capability to continue their employee-roles. Qualitative investigation method was used for investigating the study topic. Focus groups comprised of broad questions followed by probing were utilized to obtain detailed descriptions about the client's understandings and perspectives. Recommendations involved developing the insight of stakeholders regarding early, valuable on-job training, initiating health-promotion by teaching in the workplace and in the society, along with improving fl exible job and health policy. Results of the investigation signify that the goal of physiotherapy and extent of service to back injured patients needs to rebuild.

Background: Pronated foot is a deformity with various degrees of physical impact. Patients with a pronated foot experience issues such as foot pain, ankle pain, heel pain, shin splints, impaired balance, plantar fasciitis, etc. Objective: The study intended to compare the effectiveness of IASTM (instrument-assisted soft tissue mobilization) and static stretching on ankle flexibility, foot posture, foot function, and balance in patients with a flexible pronated foot. Methods: Seventy-two participants between the ages of 18–25 years with a flexible pronated foot were included and allocated into three groups: Control, stretching, and IASTM group using single-blinded randomization. Range of motion (ROM) measuring ankle flexibility, foot posture index (FPI), foot function index (FFI), and dynamic balance was measured at baseline and after 4 weeks of intervention. Soft tissue mobilization was applied on to the IASTM group, while the stretching group was directed in static stretching of the gastrocnemius-soleus complex, tibialis anterior, and Achilles tendon in addition to the foot exercises. The control group received only foot exercises for 4 weeks. Results: The result shows the significant improvement of the right dominant foot in ROM plantar flexion, (F = 3.94, p = 0.03), dorsiflexion (F = 3.15, p = 0.05), inversion (F = 8.54, p = 0.001) and eversion (F = 5.93, p = 0.005), FFI (control vs. IASTM, mean difference (MD) = 5.9, p < 0.001), FPI (right foot, control vs. IASTM MD = 0.88, p = 0.004), and in dynamic balance of the right-leg stance (anterior, pre vs. post = 88.55 ± 2.28 vs. 94.65 ± 2.28; anteromedial, pre vs. post = 80.65 ± 2.3 vs. 85.55 ± 2.93; posterior, pre vs. post = 83 ± 3.52 vs. 87 ± 2.99 and lateral, pre vs. post = 73.2 ± 5.02 vs. 78.05 ± 4.29) in the IASTM group. The FFI was increased remarkably in the stretching group as compared to the control group. Conclusions: Myofascial release technique, i.e., IASTM with foot exercises, significantly improves flexibility, foot posture, foot function, and dynamic balance as compared to stretching, making it a choice of treatment for patients with a flexible pronated foot.

Introduction: Gait is a major function of independence that determines the quality of life, participation, and restriction. Gait assessment in physical therapy practice is fundamental for assessing musculoskeletal conditions. This study planned to determine the extent and barriers of using gait assessment tools by physical therapists in clinical practice in Saudi Arabia. Method: A cross-sectional design was used. A standardized survey was sent through e-mail and social media to physical therapists working in hospitals, clinics, and rehabilitation centers in different Saudi Arabian regions. Results: A total of 320 physical therapists from different regions in Saudi Arabia participated. There was a significant relationship between using gait assessment tools by physical therapists and patient groups (p = 0.002), receiving training (p = 0.001), dealing with patients who suffer from gait problems (p = 0.001), and visiting the gait laboratory (p = 0.001). Physical therapists’ use of gait assessment tools for musculoskeletal conditions in clinical practice in Saudi Arabia was limited. The primary barrier preventing physical therapists from using gait assessment methods in clinical practice was a lack of resources, including instruments, space, time, and funds.

Increasing emphasis is placed on physical functional measures to examine treatments for chronic low back pain (CLBP). The Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale (Hindi version) (QBPDS-H) has never been evaluated for responsiveness. The objectives of this study were to (1) examine the internal and external responsiveness of the Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale (Hindi version) (QBPDS-H) and (2) find out the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and minimal detectable change (MDC) in the functional ability of patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP) undergoing multimodal physical therapy treatment. In this prospective cohort study, QBPDS-H responses were recorded at the baseline and after eight weeks from 156 CLBP patients undergoing multimodal physiotherapy treatment. To differentiate between the clinically unimproved (n = 65, age: 44.16 ± 11.8 years) and clinically improved (n = 91, age: 43.28 ± 10.7 years) scores of patients from the initial assessment to the last follow-up, the Hindi version of the Patient’s Global Impression of Change (H-PGIC) scale was utilized. Internal responsiveness was large (E.S. (pooled S.D.) (n = 91): 0.98 (95% CI = 1.14–0.85) and Standardized Response Mean (S.R.M.) (n = 91): 2.57 (95% CI = 3.05–2.17)). In addition, the correlation coefficient and receiver operative characteristics (R.O.C.) curve were used to assess the QBPDS-H external responsiveness. MCID and MDC were detected by the R.O.C. curve and standard error of measurements (S.E.M.), respectively. The H-PGIC scale showed moderate responsiveness (ρ = 0.514 and area under the curve (A.U.C.) = 0.658; 95% CI, 0.596–0.874), while the MDC achieved 13.68 points, and the MCID was found have 6 points (A.U.C. = 0.82; 95% CI: 0.74–0.88, sensitivity = 90%, specificity = 61%). This study shows that QBPDS-H has moderate levels of responsiveness in CLBP patients receiving multimodal physical therapy treatment, so it can be used to measure the changes in disability scores. MCID and MDC changes were also reported with QBPDS-H.