Effectiveness of Muscle Energy Technique as Compared to Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation in Non-Specific Low Back Pain: RCT

  • Patel S
  • Khatri S
  • Patel P
N/ACitations
Citations of this article
21Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Background: Approximately 80% of peoples experience LBP during their lifetime. While a specific cause of low back pain can seldom be identified, the most prevalent type is mechanical & non-specific low back pain. This study was designed to evaluate the two manual techniques i.e., MET & PNF in participants with non-specific low back pain. MET is used to decrease pain & the PNF goal is the facilitation of the agonist’s muscle.Objectives:A Study to find the effectiveness of MET as compared to PNF to reduce pain and improve strength and function in participants with LBP to get the best results & greater benefits for the population.Methods: In a 6-weeks intervention study, 45 participants with features of low back pain were studied. They were divided into 3 groups by simple random sampling; Group A received MET, Group B received PNF, and Group C is the control group. Pre and post-treatment data were collected and analyzed using SPSS 22.0. Paired t-test and One Way ANOVA were used to find out the significance of the treatment.Results: A significant improvement in pain, disability through the NPRS, RMDQ scale (p‹0.05), and PWB after the treatment was found. A greater statistically significant difference was seen in Group A as compared to Group B & Group C.Conclusion: The study concluded that the MET is more effective compared to the PNF & control group treating participants with LBP.Keywords: Non-Specific LBP, Muscle Energy Technique, Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation, NPRS, RMDQ

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Patel, S., Khatri, S., & Patel, P. (2022). Effectiveness of Muscle Energy Technique as Compared to Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation in Non-Specific Low Back Pain: RCT. International Journal of Research and Review, 9(3), 173–182. https://doi.org/10.52403/ijrr.20220321

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free