EFFECT OF FACETAL JOINT MOBILIZATION IN LUMBAR SPONDYLOSIS.
Â Objectives: Lumbar spondylosis is described as a degenerative condition whose symptoms recur over a period of time. Hence, the objective of this study is to find out the effect of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) and mechanical intermittent lumbar traction (MILT) (conventional therapy) with or without facetal joint mobilization in lumbar spondylosis for speedy and long-term recovery.
Method: A total of 60 subjects clinically diagnosed with lumbar spondylosis of age between 40 and 60 years were recruited and divided into two groups (Groups A and B) with baseline treatment of TENS and MILT given to both groups and facetal joint mobilization along with baseline treatment given to the study group. Pre- and post-intervention outcome were measured using visual analog scale (VAS) for pain and modified Schobers test (MST) for a range of motion.
Result: Results showed extremely significant improvement in VAS and MST score in Group A.
Conclusion: Facetal joint mobilization along with TENS and MILT is effective in relieving pain and improving range of motion in lumbar spondylosis.
2. Harsulkar SG, Khatri SM. Effectiveness of Gongâ€™s mobilization in cervical spondylosis: A prospective comparative study. Int J Community Med Public Health 2015;2(1):38-44.
3. Thakur S, Srivastava N. An update on neuropathic pain models. Int J Pharm Pharm Sci 2016;8(6):11-6.
4. Verma Y, Goyal M. Pain, range of motion and back strength in chronic mechanical low back pain before and after lumbar mobilisation. Int J Physiother Res 2013;1(3):48-57.
5. Fritz JM, Lindsay W. Results of a randomized clinical trial and subgrouping analysis. Is there a subgroup of patients with low back pain likely to benefit from mechanical traction? Spine 2007;32(26):E793-800.
6. Bijur PE, Silver W, Gallagher EJ. Reliability of the visual analog scale for measurement of acute pain. Acad Emerg Med 2001;8(12):1153-7.
7. Jagtap V, Shanmugam S. Effect of mechanical traction in osteoarthritis knee. Int J Sci Res 2014;3(10):440-3.
8. Boonstra AM, Schiphorst Preuper HR, Reneman MF, Posthumus JB, Stewart RE. Reliability and validity of the visual analogue scale for disability in patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain. Int J Rehabil Res 2008;31(2):165-9.
9. Lee RY, Evans JH. Loads in the lumbar spine during traction therapy. Aust J Physiother 2001;47:102-8.
10. Heijden V, Beurskens A, Dirx M, Bouter LM, Lindeman E. A pilot study to compare the effect of high-dose continuous lumbar traction and low-dose continuous lumbartractionon the magnitude and rate of recovery for patients with low back pain. Phys Ther 1995;81:29-35.
11. Hanrahan S, Van Lunen BL, Tamburello M, Walker ML. The short-term effects of Joint mobilizations on acute mechanical low back dysfunction in collegiate athletes. J Athl Train 2005;40(2):88-93.
12. Jackson RP, Jacobs RR, Montesano PX 1988 Volvo award in clinical sciences. Facet joint injection in low-back pain. A prospective statistical study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1988;13:966-71.
13. Johnson M. TENS. In: Watson. T, editor. Electrotherapy: Evidence Based Practice. Edinburgh: Elsevier; 2008.
14. Twomey LT. Sustained lumbar traction. An experimental study of long spine segments. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1985;10:146-9.
15. Watkins LR, Mayer DJ. Organization of endogenous opiate and nonopiate pain control systems. Science 1982;216:1185-92.
The publication is licensed under CC By and is open access. Copyright is with author and allowed to retain publishing rights without restrictions.