• Users Online: 23
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2019  |  Volume : 1  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 17-23

Effect of mulligans mobilization versus manipulation, along with mulligans taping in anterior innominate dysfunction – A randomized clinical trial


Department of Orthopaedic Manual Therapy, KAHER Institute of Physiotherapy, Belagavi, Karnataka, India

Correspondence Address:
Ms. Saviola Ribeiro
Department of Orthopaedic Manual Therapy, KAHER Institute of Physiotherapy, Belagavi, Karnataka
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/ijptr.ijptr_20_19

Rights and Permissions

Background and Objective: Low back pain is one of the major causes for disability and absenteeism at workplace. The anterior innominate dysfunction is a common type of dysfunction leading to low back pain in which the joint adapts to an abnormal position locking it in an anterior pelvic tilt thus leading to low back or buttock pain that may radiate to lower extremity pain. Mulligan mobilization particularly helps restoration of joint movement in a pain free manner and has reported to be effective in increasing range of motion and reducing pain. Manipulation, on the other hand has also proved to be effective in inhibiting pain receptors causing relaxation of muscle and increasing range of motion. Since there is a dearth of literature stating the comparative effects of both techniques, the current study has aimed at finding out the effectiveness of both techniques on anterior innominate dysfunction. Materials and Methods: A clinical trial conducted on 30 subjects with a mean age of 37.57±10.32 years were randomly assigned into two groups, Group A (n = 15) received Postero-medial SI Mulligan mobilization and Mulligan taping technique + Conventional Therapy and Group B (n = 15) received SI Manipulation and Mulligan taping technique + Conventional Therapy. Patients were assessed at baseline and on 6th day of therapy using Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), Modified Oswestery Disability Questionnaire (MODQ), Modified Schober's lumbar range of motion and Pelvic Inclinometer scale Results: Pre and post mean difference in group A were 6.56±1.01 cm for VAS, 27.33±7.76 for MODQ, 1.90±0.68° for lumbar flexion range, 2.19±0.45° for lumbar extension range and 2.00±1.46 mm for pelvic tilt. While the pre and post mean difference in group B were 6.56±1.01 cm for VAS, 27.33±7.76 for MODQ, 1.90±0.68° for lumbar flexion range, 2.19±0.45° for lumbar extension range and 2.00±1.46 mm for pelvic tilt. The intra-group comparison was statistically significant with P = 0.0001 (VAS, MODQ, Lumbar flexion and extension ROM) and P < 0.05 (Pelvic tilt), the inter-group comparison was also statistically significant with P = 0.0001 (VAS and lumbar extension ROM), P = 0.0005 (Lumbar flexion ROM). Conclusion: The present study concluded that Mulligan mobilization with Mulligan taping technique showed superior effects than Manipulation with Mulligan taping technique.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed49    
    Printed2    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded7    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal