Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Instrument–assisted soft tissue mobilization versus myofascial release therapy in treatment of chronic neck pain: a randomized clinical trial
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Instrument–assisted soft tissue mobilization versus myofascial release therapy in treatment of chronic neck pain: a randomized clinical trial
Do you wish to request the book?
Instrument–assisted soft tissue mobilization versus myofascial release therapy in treatment of chronic neck pain: a randomized clinical trial
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Instrument–assisted soft tissue mobilization versus myofascial release therapy in treatment of chronic neck pain: a randomized clinical trial
2023
Overview
Objective
The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of instrument-assisted soft tissue mobilization (IASTM) versus myofascial release therapy (MRT) on college students with chronic mechanical neck pain (CMNP).
Methods
Thirty-three college students with a mean age of 21.33 ± 0.98 involved in distance learning due to the Corona Virus 2019 (COVID-19) restriction were randomized to receive either IASTM on the upper trapezius and levator scapulae muscles or MRT. Researchers measured their pain with a visual analog scale (VAS), function with neck disability index (NDI), and pain pressure threshold (PPT) with a pressure algometer. The subjects received eight therapy sessions over four weeks and outcome measures were assessed pre and post-intervention. The study was registered as a clinical trial on clinicaltrials.gov (registration number: NCT05213871).
Result
Unpaired t-test showed no statistical significance between the two groups post-intervention regarding improvement in pain, function, and PPT (p > 0.05).
Conclusion
This study showed insignificant differences between groups. However, we did not use a control group, indicating that the improvement in outcomes may not have been caused by the intervention.
Study design
Quasi-experimental two groups pre-posttest clinical trial.
Level of evidence
Therapy, level 2b.
Publisher
BioMed Central,BioMed Central Ltd,Springer Nature B.V,BMC
Subject
