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

IJPR.2016.204

DOWNLOAD PDF
Table of Contents

Type of Article:  Original Research

Volume 5; Issue 3 (June 2017)

Page No.: 2056-2060

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.16965/ijpr.2016.204

IMMEDIATE EFFECTS OF TRIPLANAR MYOFASCIAL RELEASE VS SUBOCCIPITAL RELEASE IN SUBJECTS WITH NON-SPECIFIC NECK PAIN: A CLINICAL TRIAL

Vijay Kage 1, Pavan Joshi *2.

1 Associate professor, HOD Dept. of Orthopedic Physiotherapy, KLEU Institute of Physiotherapy, Belgaum, Karnataka, India.

*2 Post graduate, Dept of Orthopedic Physiotherapy, KLEU Institute of Physiotherapy, Belgaum, Karnataka, India.

Address for Correspondence: Dr. Pavan Joshi,  Post graduate, Dept of Orthopedic Physiotherapy, KLEU Institute of Physiotherapy, Belgaum, Karnataka, India. E-Mail: 

ABSTRACT 

Background: Cervical spine pain is a common musculoskeletal problem affecting 70% of individuals within their lifetime which can significantly affect physical and social function. Myofascial pain syndrome is characterized by muscle pain caused by MTrPs. Myofascial therapy defined as “the facilitation of mechanical, neural, and psychophysiological adaptive potential as interfaced in the myofascial system. suboccipital release is also known as cranial base release. Muscle of the neck and upper back attach to the base of the occiput and often contains many  hyperactive trigger points.

Materials and Methods: The study was performed on 30 subjects, both male and female  between age 20 years to 45 years old. Subjects were randomly selected for collection of data. Assessment of physical parameters were noted such as, height, weight and BMI. Subjects were divided into 2 groups as follows:Group A (n=15) recieved Triplanar myofascial release technique and Group B (n=15) recieved suboccipital release technique. Pain assessment, NDI, PPA was done pre and post intervention.

Results: Among the 30 subjects, the mean age group the participants in group A 24.60±5.36, the means age group of particiapants in group B was 26.33±7.62. the results showed high significance in the group B.

Conclusion: Study shows decreased in the pain and disability in group B.

KEY WORDS: Myofascial Release, Trigger Points, Suboccipital Release.

REFERENCES

  1. Orthopaedic manual therapy, an evidence based approach, CHAD E. COOK:2007page no-93.
  2. Pierre, J. David Cassidy, Linda J. Carroll, Vicki Kristman. The annual incidence and course of neck pain in the general population: a population-based cohort study. 1 September (2004) 267–273.
  3. BD Chaurasia, Anatomy 3 volume, chapter no 4, 5th edition:2010, page no-83.
  4. The myofascial relase manual,Carol J. Manheim,3rd edition, page no 28.
  5. The myofascial relase manual,Carol J. Manheim,3rd edition, page no
  6. Jay Kain,Cornrparison of an indirect tri-planar myofascial release (MFR) technique and a hot pack for increasing range of motion,Journal of Bodywork & Movement Therapies 2011;15:63-67.
  7. Fabio Antonaci, Trond Sand, pressure algometry in healthy subjects: inter examiner varibility, Scand J Rehab Med 1998;30:3–8.
  8. Ekta S. Chaudhary, Nehal Shah, Comparative Study of Myofascial Release and Cold Pack in Upper Trapezius Spasm, International Journal of Health Sciences & Research 2013;3(12);20-27.
  9. William P. Hanten, Melinda Barrett, Effects of active head retraction with retraction/extension and occipital release on the pressure pain threshold of cervical and scapular trigger points, physiotherapy theory and practice 1997;13:285-291.

Cite this article: Vijay Kage, Pavan Joshi. IMMEDIATE EFFECTS OF TRIPLANAR MYOFASCIAL RELEASE VS SUBOCCIPITAL RELEASE IN SUBJECTS WITH NON-SPECIFIC NECK PAIN: A CLINICAL TRIAL. Int J Physiother Res 2017;5(3):2056-2060. DOI: 10.16965/ijpr.2016.204
Post Views: 0