Status
Conditions
Treatments
About
Objective:The study aimed to compare the effectiveness of Positional Release Technique (PRT) and Muscle Energy Technique (MET) in reducing pain and improving outcomes for patients suffering from non-specific low back pain (NSLBP).
Materials and Methods: Thirty-six patients between the ages of 25 and 50, all referred by an orthopedic surgeon for treatment of non-specific low back pain (NSLBP), were enrolled in the study. Participants were randomly allocated into two groups (n=18 per group) using a computer-generated randomization sequence. However, details regarding allocation concealment and blinding of participants or assessors were not specified, which may influence the risk of bias. Group A received Positional Release Technique (PRT), while Group B received Muscle Energy Technique (MET). Prior to each treatment session, both groups received a standardized 15-minute hot pack application as a co-intervention to promote muscle relaxation and ensure consistency across interventions. Pain intensity was assessed using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), and functional outcomes were measured with the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMQ). Participants in both groups attended three physiotherapy sessions per week over a four-week treatment period.
Full description
Study Identification
Official Title:
Positional Release Technique Versus Muscle Energy Technique for Patients with Non-Specific Low Back Pain With Facet Joint Restriction
Brief Title:
PRT vs MET in Non-Specific Low Back Pain
Study Type:
Interventional (Clinical Trial)
Phase:
Not Applicable
Study Description
Brief Summary:
This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of Positional Release Technique (PRT) and Muscle Energy Technique (MET) in reducing pain and improving outcomes for patients suffering from non-specific low back pain with suspected facet joint dysfunction. Thirty-six patients were randomized into two groups and received treatment for 4 weeks, 3 sessions per week. Pain intensity (VAS) and functional disability (Roland-Morris Questionnaire) were assessed pre- and post-intervention.
Study Design
Allocation: Randomized
Intervention Model: Parallel Assignment
Masking: None (Open Label)
Primary Purpose: Treatment
Conditions & Interventions
Condition:
Non-Specific Low Back Pain (NSLBP)
Interventions:
Group A (PRT): Positional Release Technique - 3 sessions/week for 4 weeks with hot pack co-intervention.
Group B (MET): Muscle Energy Technique - 3 sessions/week for 4 weeks with hot pack co-intervention.
Outcome Measures
Primary Outcome Measures:
Pain intensity (VAS) - Baseline and after 4 weeks.
Functional disability (Roland-Morris Questionnaire, RMQ) - Baseline and after 4 weeks.
Eligibility
Ages Eligible for Study: 25-50 years
Sexes Eligible for Study: All
Inclusion Criteria: Chronic NSLBP >3 months, suspected facet joint dysfunction.
Exclusion Criteria: History of spinal surgery, vertebral fracture, osteoporosis, inflammatory/metabolic bone disease, spondylolisthesis.
Enrollment
Enrollment: 36 participants (actual)
Locations
Maqassed Hospital, East Jerusalem, Palestine
Enrollment
Sex
Ages
Volunteers
Inclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria
Primary purpose
Allocation
Interventional model
Masking
36 participants in 2 patient groups
Loading...
Data sourced from clinicaltrials.gov
Clinical trials
Research sites
Resources
Legal