Pakistan journal of medical sciences · 2021
Effectiveness of mechanical traction in supine versus prone lying position for lumbosacral radiculopathy.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Khan Rehan Ramzan, Riaz Saima, Rashid Sajid, Sulman Muhammad
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: To determine the effectiveness of mechanical traction in supine versus prone lying position for lumbosacral radiculopathy.
METHODS: A quasi experimental trial was conducted from April to September 2020 among sixty patients of chronic lumbosacral radiculopathy at Ibn e Siena Hospital, Multan. Participants were divided into two groups. Group-A (Supine) participants received lumbar traction in supine lying along with conventional treatment. Group-B (Prone) underwent the same treatment except the lumbar traction being applied in prone lying position. Participants were evaluated twice: at pre- treatment (week 0) and at the post treatment (week 2). Oswestry Disability Index and Numeric Pain Rating Scale were used as outcome measure. Data was analyzed on SPSS 23.
RESULTS: The mean (±S.D) age of the patients was 39±5.7 vs. 40±5.3 years in supine vs. prone group respectively. Mean ODI score was 25.2±6.13 vs. 26.0±6.26 at the start of treatment in supine vs. prone position respectively while it was 19.45±7.12 vs. 11.05±4.40 at end of treatment in supine vs. prone position respectively. Mean NPRS score was 7.73±1.23 vs. 7.67±0.96 at start of treatment in supine vs. prone position respectively while it was 4.63±0.89 vs. 3.13±0.90 at the end of treatment in supine vs. prone position respectively.
CONCLUSION: Lumbar traction in prone lying position is more effective than lumbar traction in supine lying position for the treatment of chronic lumbosacral radiculopathy.
METHODS: A quasi experimental trial was conducted from April to September 2020 among sixty patients of chronic lumbosacral radiculopathy at Ibn e Siena Hospital, Multan. Participants were divided into two groups. Group-A (Supine) participants received lumbar traction in supine lying along with conventional treatment. Group-B (Prone) underwent the same treatment except the lumbar traction being applied in prone lying position. Participants were evaluated twice: at pre- treatment (week 0) and at the post treatment (week 2). Oswestry Disability Index and Numeric Pain Rating Scale were used as outcome measure. Data was analyzed on SPSS 23.
RESULTS: The mean (±S.D) age of the patients was 39±5.7 vs. 40±5.3 years in supine vs. prone group respectively. Mean ODI score was 25.2±6.13 vs. 26.0±6.26 at the start of treatment in supine vs. prone position respectively while it was 19.45±7.12 vs. 11.05±4.40 at end of treatment in supine vs. prone position respectively. Mean NPRS score was 7.73±1.23 vs. 7.67±0.96 at start of treatment in supine vs. prone position respectively while it was 4.63±0.89 vs. 3.13±0.90 at the end of treatment in supine vs. prone position respectively.
CONCLUSION: Lumbar traction in prone lying position is more effective than lumbar traction in supine lying position for the treatment of chronic lumbosacral radiculopathy.