https://www.ijmhr.org/ijpr.html editor_physiotherapy@hotmail.com
ISSN:       2321-1822 (E) 2321-8975 (P)

IJPR.2017.180

DOWNLOAD PDF
Table of Contents

Type of Article:  Original Research

Volume 5; Issue 4 (August 2017)

Page No.: 2240-2248

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.16965/ijpr.2017.180

EFFECT OF SNAGS MULLIGAN TECHNIQUE VERSUS LOW LEVEL LASER THERAPY ON PATIENTS WITH UNILATERAL CERVICAL RADICULOPATHY

Ghada A. Abdallah 1,  Rabab A. Mohamed *2, Moussa  A. Sharaf 3.

1, 2*Lecturer, Basic Science Department, Faculty of Physical Therapy, Cairo University, Giza, Egypt.

3Assistant Professor, Physical Therapy Department for Neuromuscular Disorders and its Surgery, Faculty of Physical Therapy, Cairo University, Egypt.

Address for correspondence: Dr. Rabab Ali Mohamed, PhD., Lecturer, Basic Science Department, Faculty of Physical Therapy, Cairo University, Giza, Egypt. E-Mail: rabab_ali1978@hotmail.com

ABSTRACT

Background: Cervical radiculopathy is a condition caused by the compression of the nerve root in cervical spine that commonly manifests as neck pain and it may also radiate from the neck into the distribution of the affected nerve root. There is a significant amount of evidence available to support the benefit of physical therapy and manual techniques in general for patients with neck pain with or without radicular symptoms.

Objective: This study was conducted to assess the efficacy of Mulligan mobilization and low level laser therapy (LLLT) on pain intensity level, EMG dermatomal somatosensory evoked potential and functional level in patients with unilateral cervical radiculopathy.

Materials and Methods: Fifty patients of both genders with diagnosis of unilateral cervical radiculopathy, their ages ranged from 40 to 55. They were randomly assigned into two groups; Group A: Patients received SNAGs Mulligan technique, in addition to conventional program. Group B: Patients received LLLT, in addition to conventional program.  The treatment was conducted at a frequency of three sessions per week for four weeks.

Results: Patients in both groups showed significant improvement post treatment in all the measured variables ; there was non-significant difference between two groups post-study in pain level where P-value was (0.128). There were no significant differences between two groups in amplitude, distal latency post-study, where P-values were (0.132) and (0.328) respectively. There were no significant differences between two groups in functional ability, where P-value was (0.156).

Conclusion: Study concludes that both LLLT and SNAGs Mulligan techniques have shown positive results and are effective in improvements in pain intensity, EMG dermatomal somatosensory evoked potential and functional level among Patients with unilateral cervical radiculopathy.

KEY WORDS: SNAGS Mulligan Technique, Low level laser therapy, Dermatomal Somatosensory Evoked Potential, cervical radiculopathy.

REFERENCES

  1. Radhakrishnan K, litchy W J, O’fallon M, Kurlan L T. Epidemiology of cervical radiculopathy a population based study from Rochestor Minneosta, 1976 through 1990 Brain 1994;117:325-335.
  2. Kimura J. Electrodiagnosis in diseases of nerve and muscle, Oxford University Press; 2001.
  3. González-Iglesias J, Cleland JA, Neto F, Hall T, Fernández-de-las-Peñas C. Mobilization with movement, thoracic spine manipulation, and dry needling for the management of temporomandibular disorder: A prospective case series. Physiother Theory Pract. 2013;29(8):586-595.
  4. Brain R Mulligan. Manual therapy. „NAGS‟, „SNAGS‟, „MWM‟ etc. 4th edition, New Zealand, Wellington. 1999;16-24.
  5. Bill Vincenzino, Aatit Paungmali, Pamela Teys. Mulligan‟s mobilization with movement, positional faults and pain relief: current concepts from a critivcal review of literature. Manual Therapy 2007.
  6. Aatit Paungmali, Shaun O Leary, Tina Soulvis. Hypoalgaesic and sympathoexcitatory effects of mobilization with movement for lateral epicondyalgia. Physical Therapy; 2003;83:374-83.
  7. Yagci I, Elmas O, Akcan E, Ustun I, Gunduz OH, Guven Z .Comparison of splinting and splinting plus low-level laser therapy in idiopathic carpal tunnel syndrome. Clin Rheumatol, 2009;28:1059-1065.
  8. Bakhtiary AH, Rashidy-Pour A . Ultrasound and laser therapy in the treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome. Aust J Physiother, 2004;50:147-151.
  9. Bae CS, Lim SC, Kim KY, Song CH, Pak S, Kim SG, Jang CH. Effect of Ga-as laser on the regeneration of injured sciatic nerves in the rat. In Vivo, 2004;18:489–495.
  10. Vinck E, Coorevits P, Cagnie B, De Muynck M, Vanderstraeten G, Cambier D Evidence of changes in sural nerve conduction mediated by light emitting diode irradiation. Lasers Med Sci, 2005;20:35–40.
  11. Medrado AR, Pugliese LS, Reis SR, Andrade ZA. Influence of low level laser therapy on wound healing and its biological action upon myofibroblasts. Lasers Surg Med, 2003;32:239–244.
  12. Ferreira DM, Zaˆngaro RA, Villaverde AB, Cury Y, Frigo L, Picolo G, Longo I, Barbosa DG. Analgesic effect of He-Ne (632.8 nm) low-level laser therapy on acute inflammatory pain. Photomed Laser Surg, 2005;23:177–181.
  13. Bjordal JM, Lopes-Martins RA, Iversen VV. A randomized, placebo controlled trial of low level laser therapy for activated Achilles tendinitis with micro dialysis measurement of peritendinous prostaglandin E2 concentrations. Br J Sports Med 2006;40:76–80.
  14. Jarvis D, MacIver B, Tanelian DL. Electrophysiologic recording and thermodynamic modeling demonstrate that heliumneon laser irradiation does not affect peripheral Ad- or C-fiber nociceptors. Pain, 1990;43:235–242.
  15. Delfino, P. D., Rampim, D. B., Alfieri, F. M., Tomikawa, L. C. O., Fadel, G., Stump, P. R. N. A. G., Imamura, S. T., Imamura, M., and Battistella, L. R. Neck pain: Rehabilitation. Acta fisiátrica, 2012;19(2).
  16. Young IA, Michener LA, Cleland JA and Aguilera AJ and Snyder AR. Manual therapy, Exercises, and traction for patients with cervical radiculopathy- A randomized clinical trial. American Physical therapy Association. 2009;89(7).
  17. Gautam, R., Dhamija, J. K., Puri, A., Trivedi, P., Sathiyavani, D., Nambi, G., Khuman, R., Shah, K., Bhatt, P., and Elshafey, M. A. Comparison of maitland and mulligan mobilization in improving neck pain, rom and disability. Int J Physiother Res, 2014;2(3):561-566.
  18. Malanga GA. The diagnosis and treatment of cervical radiculopathy. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1997;Jul. 29(7 suppl):S236-45.
  19. Reyes-Sánchez A, Patwardhan A, Block J. The M6 artificial cervical disc. 2008;272-276.
  20. The American Academy of Neurology. Assessment  Dermatomal somatosensory evoked potentials. Neurology,1997;49:1127-1130.
  21. Vernon H .The neck disability index state-of-the-art. Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics, 2008;31(7):491-502.
  22. Houghton PE. The role of therapeutic modalities in wound healing. In Prentice WE, editor. Therapeutic modalities in rehabilitation. New York McGraw-Hill Medical;. 2011;37–69.
  23. Ferraz MB, Quaresma MR, Aquino LR, Atra E, Tugwell P, Goldsmith CH. Reliability of pain scales in the assessment of literate and illiterate patients with rheumatoid arthritis. J Rheumatol 1990;17(8):1022–4.
  24. Cruccu, G., Aminoff, M., Curio, G., Guerit, J., Kakigi, R., Mauguiere, F., Rossini, P., Treede, R.-D., and Garcia-Larrea, L. Recommendations for the clinical use of somatosensory-evoked potentials. Clinical neurophysiology, 2008;119(8):1705-1719.
  25. Haanpää, M., Attal, N., Backonja, M., Baron, R., Bennett, M., Bouhassira, D., Cruccu, G., Hansson, P., Haythornthwaite, J. A., and Iannetti, G. D. Neupsig guidelines on neuropathic pain assessment. PAIN®,2011;152(1):14-27.
  26. Cameron, M. H. Physical agents in rehabilitation – e book: From research to practice. 2013:pp. 149-157: Elsevier Health Sciences.
  27. Mulligan B. part one, spinal mobilization chapter, manual therapy, NAGS” “SNAGS”  “MWMS”, 5th ed, Plane View Press, Wellington, 2004:9-11.
  28. Guzman J, Haldeman S, Carroll LJ, et al. Clinical practice implications of the results of the Bone and Joint DECADE 2000–2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and its Associated Disorders: From concepts and findings to recommendations. Eur Spine J 2008;17:S199–213.
  29. Autio RA, Karppinen J, Niinimäki J, et al. The effect of infliximab, a monoclonal antibody against TNF-[alpha], on disc herniation resorption: A randomized controlled study. Spine 2006;31:2641–5.
  30. Cheng, C.-H., Tsai, L.-C., Chung, H.-C., Hsu, W.-L., Wang, S.-F., Wang, J.-L., Lai, D.-M., and Chien, A. Exercise training for non-operative and post-operative patient with cervical radiculopathy: A literature review. Journal of physical therapy science, 2015;27(9):3011.
  31. Pamela Teys, Leanne Bisset, Natalie Collins, Brooke Coombes, Bill Vicenzio. One week time course of the effects of Mulligan’s mobilization with movement & taping in painful shoulders. Manual Therapy 2013; 18(5):372-377.
  32. Nicholas S. Nicholas. Atlas of Osteopathic Techniques. 2nd ed. Classic Osteopathic Medical Works; 1974.
  33. Y. Hsieh, B.Vicenzino, C.H.Yang, M.H. Hu, C. Yang. Mulligan’s mobilization with movement for the thumb: A single case report using magnetic resonance imaging to evaluate the positional fault hypothesis. Manual Therapy 2002;7(1):44-49.
  34. Linda Exelby. Peripheral mobilizations with movement. Manual Therapy 1996;1:118-126.
  35. A Paungmali, Shaun O’Leary, T Souvlis, B Vicenzino,et al. Hypoalgesic and Sympathoexcitatory effects of Mobilization with movement for Lateral Epicondylalgia.Physical Therapy.2003;83:374-383.
  36. Bill Vicenzino,Aatit Paungmali, Pamela Teys. Mulligan’s mobilization-with-movement, positional faults and pain relief: Current concepts from a critical review of literature.Manual Therapy, 2006.
  37. Anap DB, Shende ML, Khatri S (2012) Mobilization with Movement Technique as an Adjunct to Conventional Physiotherapy in Treatment of Chronic Lateral Epicondylits-A Comparative Study. J Nov Physiother 2:121. doi: 10.4172/2165-7025.1000121.
  38. B Vicenzino.Lateral epicondylalgia. A physiotherapy perspective. Manual therapy. 2003;8(2):66-79.
  39. Bjordal JM, Couppé C, Ljunggren AE. Low-level laser therapy for tendinopathy. Evidence of a doseresponse pattern. Phys Ther Rev 2001;6:91–9.
  40. Bjordal JM, Couppé C, Chow RT, Tunér J, Ljunggren EA. A systematic review of low-level laser therapy with location specific doses for pain from chronic joint disorders. Aust J Physiother 2003;49:107–16.
  41. Reis SR, Medrado AP, Marchionni AM, et al. Effect of 670-nm laser therapy and dexamethasone on tissue repair: A histological and ultrastructural study. Photomed Laser Surg 2008;26:307–13.
  42. Vasheghani MM, Bayat M, Rezaei F, Bayat A, Karimipour M. Effect of low-level laser therapy on mast cells in deep second-degree burns of rats. Photomed Laser Surg 2008;26:1–5.
  43. Gigo-Benato D, Geuna S, Rochkind S. Phototherapy for enhancing peripheral nerve repair: A review of the literature. Muscle Nerve 2005;31(6):694–701.
  44. Bashiri H. Evaluation of low level laser therapy in reducing diabetic polyneuropathy related pain and sensorimotor disorders. Acta Med Iran. 2013;51(8):543–547.
  45. Chow RT, David MA, Armati PJ. 830 nm laser irradiation induces varicosity formation, reduces mitochondrial membrane potential and blocks fast axonal flow in small and medium diameter rat dorsal root ganglion neurons: implications for the analgesic effects of 830 nm laser. J Peripher Nerv Syst.2007;12(1):28–39.
  46. Tsuchiya K, Kawatani M, Takeshige C, Sato T, Matsumoto I. Diode laser irradiation selectively diminishes slow component of axonal volleys to dorsal roots from the saphenous nerve in the rat. Neurosci Lett 1993;161:65-8.
  47. Wall PD. New horizons—An essay. In: Bridenbaugh PO, Cousins MJ, eds. Neural Blockade in Clinical Anaesthesia and Management of Pain. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott-Raven Publishers; 1998;1135-43.
  48. Arnér S, Lindblom U, Meyerson BA, Molander C. Prolonged relief of neuralgia after regional anesthetic blocks. A call for further experimental and systematic clinical studies. Pain 1990;43:287–97.
  49. Laakso EL, Cramond T, Richardson C, Galligan JP. Plasma Acth and beta-endorphin levels in response to low level laser therapy (LLLT) for myofascial trigger points. Laser Ther 1994;6:133-42.

Cite this article: Ghada A. Abdallah, Rabab A. Mohamed, Moussa A. Sharaf. EFFECT OF SNAGS MULLIGAN TECHNIQUE VERSUS LOW LEVEL LASER THERAPY ON PATIENTS WITH UNILATERAL CERVICAL RADICULOPATHY. Int J Physiother Res 2017;5(4):2240-2248. DOI: 10.16965/ijpr.2017.180