Effects of Autogenic and Reciprocal Inhibition, Muscle Energy Techniques in the Management of Mechanical Neck Pain

Overview

Neck pain is among the most common musculoskeletal disorders worldwide and is an important public health issue in terms of personal wellbeing. Prevalence of neck pain show excessive variations, with a point prevalence varying between 6% and 22%, and one year prevalence ranging between 1.5-75%. Neck pain like all other mechanical disorders leads to pain, disability and decreased range of motion (ROM). Stretching is a very common exercise performed by sportsmen, elderly, in physical therapy and rehabilitation patients, thus practiced in all sorts of fitness programs. The major types of stretching included in the literature are static, dynamic and pre-contraction stretching; of which static stretching is the conventional type of stretching. The different types of pre-contraction stretching include Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation (PNF) stretching, Post Isometric Relaxation (PIR), Post Facilitation stretch (PFS) and Active Isolated Stretch (AIS). Pre-contraction stretching is also considered a part of Muscle Energy Technique (MET). Recently MET and pre-contraction stretching have been shown to have significant superiority over conventional stretching in management of mechanical neck pain, but the evidence is currently lacking regarding which of the two pre-contraction stretching protocols, namely autogenic and reciprocal inhibition is more effective than the other. A RCT will be conducted in order to find and compare the effectiveness of conventional stretching and pre-contraction stretching (autogenic inhibition and reciprocal inhibition). One Control group (conventional group) and two Experimental groups (Experimental Group A – Autogenic Inhibition & Experimental Group B - Reciprocal Inhibition) will be formed. The participants will be recruited in the study if they meet the inclusion criteria using consecutive sampling from Fauji Foundation Hospital and randomized into the three respective groups. All the groups will receive the gold standard treatment for chronic neck pain including mobilization and modalities. In addition to the gold standard treatment the participants will receive specific stretching protocol based on their interventional group

Study Type

  • Study Type: Interventional
  • Study Design
    • Allocation: Randomized
    • Intervention Model: Parallel Assignment
    • Primary Purpose: Treatment
    • Masking: Triple (Participant, Investigator, Outcomes Assessor)
  • Study Primary Completion Date: November 30, 2017

Interventions

  • Other: Group A (Control Group – Static Stretching + Standard Treatment)
    • o Conventional Gold Standard treatment (Manual Therapy + Modalities) Conventional Static Stretching 15-30 seconds hold 3-5 repetitions (Page P, 2012) for Ant/Middle/Posterior Scaleni, Sternocleidomastoid, Levator Scapulae and Upper Trapezius Muscles.
  • Other: Group B (Autogenic Inhibition – PIR + Standard treatment)
    • o Conventional Gold Standard treatment (Manual Therapy + Modalities) Post Isometric Relaxation MET (3-5 reps) for Ant/Middle/Posterior Scaleni, Sternocleidomastoid, Levator Scapulae and Upper Trapezius Muscles. (Chaitow L, 2006)
  • Other: Group C (Reciprocal Inhibition – RI + Standard treatment)
    • o Conventional Gold Standard treatment (Manual Therapy + Modalities) Reciprocal Inhibition MET (3-5 reps) for Ant/Middle/Posterior Scaleni, Sternocleidomastoid,Levator Scapulae and Upper Trapezius Muscles (Chaitow L, 2006)

Arms, Groups and Cohorts

  • Active Comparator: Group A (Control Group – Static Stretching)
    • (Control Group – Static Stretching + Standard Treatment)
  • Experimental: Group B (Autogenic Inhibition MET)
    • (Autogenic Inhibition – PIR + Standard treatment)
  • Experimental: Group C (Reciprocal Inhibition MET)
    • (Reciprocal Inhibition – RI + Standard treatment)

Clinical Trial Outcome Measures

Primary Measures

  • Pain (Numeric Pain Rating Scale) – Change is being assessed
    • Time Frame: Pre-treatment (First day before treatment), Immediate Follow Up (After 1st treatment session) & Follow Up (After 5 days of Treatment)
    • To measure the pre and post patient’s perception of pain
  • Cervical Range of Motion (CROM) – Change is being assessed
    • Time Frame: Pre-treatment (First day before treatment), Immediate Follow Up (After 1st treatment session) & Follow Up (After 5 days of Treatment)
    • To measure patient’s improvement in cervical range of motion
  • Neck Disability Index (NDI) – Change is being assessed
    • Time Frame: Pre-treatment (First day before treatment), Immediate Follow Up (After 1st treatment session) & Follow Up (After 5 days of Treatment)
    • to measure patient’s pre and post functional disability
  • Cervical Isometric Muscle Strength (Modified Sphygmomanometer dynamometry) – Change is being assessed
    • Time Frame: Pre-treatment (First day before treatment), Immediate Follow Up (After 1st treatment session) & Follow Up (After 5 days of Treatment)
    • To measure patient’s improvement in Isometric Muscle Strength

Participating in This Clinical Trial

Inclusion Criteria

1. Age 18 to 70 years; 2. Neck pain on NPRS 4 to 8 (moderate cases); 3. Subacute or chronic cases (4 to 12 weeks). 4. Decreased or painful Cervical range of motion (CROM) Exclusion Criteria:

1. Signs of serious pathology (e.g., malignancy, inflammatory disorder, infection); 2. History of cervical spine surgery in previous 12 months; 3. History of trauma or fractures in cervical spine; 4. Signs of cervical radiculopathy or myelopathy; and 5. Vascular syndromes such as VBI

Gender Eligibility: All

Minimum Age: 18 Years

Maximum Age: 70 Years

Are Healthy Volunteers Accepted: Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Investigator Details

  • Lead Sponsor
    • Foundation University Islamabad
  • Provider of Information About this Clinical Study
    • Sponsor
  • Overall Official(s)
    • Muhammad Osama, DPT, MS-OMPT, CHPE, Principal Investigator, Foundation University Islamabad

Clinical trials entries are delivered from the US National Institutes of Health and are not reviewed separately by this site. Please see the identifier information above for retrieving further details from the government database.

At TrialBulletin.com, we keep tabs on over 200,000 clinical trials in the US and abroad, using medical data supplied directly by the US National Institutes of Health. Please see the About and Contact page for details.