Cranio : the journal of craniomandibular practice · 2025
Immediate effects of myofascial release and post-isometric relaxation on muscle properties and pain in symptomatic bruxism: A randomized, controlled, double-blind trial.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Tütüneken Yunus Emre, Kardeş Kübra, Zengin Alpözgen Ayşe, Güldiken İpek Necla, Sevinç Nida, Korkmaz Selin, Sevinçli Sude, Özmaden Nesrin
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: This double-blinded randomized controlled trial investigated the immediate effects of myofascial release (MFR) and post-isometric relaxation (PIR) on muscle stiffness, tone, pain, and maximum mouth opening (MMO) in individuals with bruxism, compared with a control group.
METHODS: Sixty participants were randomized into MFR (n = 20), PIR (n = 20), or control groups (n = 20). Each intervention was a single standardized session. The primary outcomes were muscle stiffness and tone, while secondary outcomes included pain severity (VAS), and MMO.
RESULTS: Both MFR and PIR significantly reduced masseter and sternocleidomastoid stiffness and tone (p < .05), except left sternocleidomastoid stiffness in MFR, with no changes in controls. MFR was superior to control for pain (p = .010) and masseter stiffness (p = .030), while PIR showed superiority only for left tone (p = .034). Both interventions reduced VAS scores (p < .001) and improved MMO (p < .05).
CONCLUSION: A single MFR or PIR session reduced stiffness, tone, and pain and improved MMO in bruxism. MFR showed stronger effects, whereas PIR yielded limited benefits.
METHODS: Sixty participants were randomized into MFR (n = 20), PIR (n = 20), or control groups (n = 20). Each intervention was a single standardized session. The primary outcomes were muscle stiffness and tone, while secondary outcomes included pain severity (VAS), and MMO.
RESULTS: Both MFR and PIR significantly reduced masseter and sternocleidomastoid stiffness and tone (p < .05), except left sternocleidomastoid stiffness in MFR, with no changes in controls. MFR was superior to control for pain (p = .010) and masseter stiffness (p = .030), while PIR showed superiority only for left tone (p = .034). Both interventions reduced VAS scores (p < .001) and improved MMO (p < .05).
CONCLUSION: A single MFR or PIR session reduced stiffness, tone, and pain and improved MMO in bruxism. MFR showed stronger effects, whereas PIR yielded limited benefits.