Comparative effectiveness of routine physical therapy with and without instrument assisted soft tissue mobilization in patients with neck pain due to upper crossed syndrome

Abstract

Objective: To determine the effectiveness of routine physical therapy with and without Instrument Assisted soft Tissue Mobilization on pain intensity, range of motion in patients with neck pain due to upper crossed syndrome. Methods: It was Randomized clinical trial. The data was collected from Physiotherapy Clinics, The Agile Institute of rehabilitation Sciences (AIRS) and National Orthopedic Hospital Bahawalpur. The study was completed from 28 August 2019 to29 February 2020 after the approval .60 patients of upper crossed syndrome diagnosed patients complaining neck pain with forwarded head posture in age range of 18-40 years were included based on following Inclusion and exclusion criteria. The subjects were divided into two equal groups of 30 each using non-probability purposive sampling technique. Outcome tool used were Inclinometer to assess range of motion and Pain by Numeric pain Rating Scale. The Data was analysed by using SPSS version 22. Criteria of significance i.e. p-value<0.05 was taken as significant at 95% Confidence Interval. Results: Pain rating at base line in experimental compared to routine physical therapy show significant improvement as P value was 0.01.The results of Neck Flexion P=0.03, Neck Right Bending P=.00, Neck Left Bending P=0.00. The results for Neck extension 0.25 show that both techniques were equally effective. Conclusion: The study concluded that addition that Instrument soft tissue mobilization with combination of stretching exercise is more effective in management of symptoms of upper crossed syndrome. Clinical Trial Number: [IRCT20190912044754N1] Keywords: IASTM, Neck Pain, Upper Crossed Syndrome, Neck Range of Motion Continuous...

Association of Text Neck Pain with prolonged Studying and Excessive Smart Phone Usage Among Medical Students

“…18 Similar results are seen in an international study where longer than 2 hours duration increases the risk of neck and shoulder pain along with headache, blurred vision, dryness, and eyestrain. 15 Headache with neck pain was the main complaint in 65.3% of students in our study, among which 4.2% had a headache all the time and 61.1% had slight to severe headache along with neck pain. A study conducted in India showed that 89.83% of mobile phone users reported headaches with neck and shoulder pain.…”

“…These results are in contrast to research conducted in another medical college in Lahore stated that 48.5% preferred smartphones. 15 Whereas another research identified 95% of the medical students with neck pain who preferred to use tablets as their main device. 16 Another study with the similar findings reported that all 100% participants had flawed flexion of their back and neck while studying and/or using smartphones and tablets.…”

Description of massage interventions in randomised clinical trials for neck pain; a review using the TIDieR checklist

“…Via the updated search 14 additional trials were added (Figure 1), making a total of 35 studies including 2840 patients with neck pain. 37–71…”

“…Six studies included people with a mean age below 30. 37,38,41,42,67,71 Three studies include only females, 51,57,64 three studies did not specify the proportion of females 42,58,67 and one trial included only males, 50 all other studies included on average 71.3% females.…”

“…37,42,69 Five trials had a ‘no treatment’ or ‘wait-list’ control group 38,40,52,60,69 and four trials had a usual care control intervention: ‘conventional physiotherapy’ either not described or consisting of mainly ineffective treatment strategies like ultrasound, hot packs, or transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation. 39,50,63,66…”