Cargando…

Effectiveness of mechanical traction in supine versus prone lying position for lumbosacral radiculopathy

OBJECTIVES: To determine the effectiveness of mechanical traction in supine versus prone lying position for lumbosacral radiculopathy. METHODS: A quasi experimental trial was conducted from April to September 2020 among sixty patients of chronic lumbosacral radiculopathy at Ibn e Siena Hospital, Mul...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Khan, Rehan Ramzan, Riaz, Saima, Rashid, Sajid, Sulman, Muhammad
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Professional Medical Publications 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8377889/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34475929
http://dx.doi.org/10.12669/pjms.37.5.4200
_version_ 1783740730036977664
author Khan, Rehan Ramzan
Riaz, Saima
Rashid, Sajid
Sulman, Muhammad
author_facet Khan, Rehan Ramzan
Riaz, Saima
Rashid, Sajid
Sulman, Muhammad
author_sort Khan, Rehan Ramzan
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: To determine the effectiveness of mechanical traction in supine versus prone lying position for lumbosacral radiculopathy. METHODS: A quasi experimental trial was conducted from April to September 2020 among sixty patients of chronic lumbosacral radiculopathy at Ibn e Siena Hospital, Multan. Participants were divided into two groups. Group-A (Supine) participants received lumbar traction in supine lying along with conventional treatment. Group-B (Prone) underwent the same treatment except the lumbar traction being applied in prone lying position. Participants were evaluated twice: at pre- treatment (week 0) and at the post treatment (week 2). Oswestry Disability Index and Numeric Pain Rating Scale were used as outcome measure. Data was analyzed on SPSS 23. RESULTS: The mean (±S.D) age of the patients was 39±5.7 vs. 40±5.3 years in supine vs. prone group respectively. Mean ODI score was 25.2±6.13 vs. 26.0±6.26 at the start of treatment in supine vs. prone position respectively while it was 19.45±7.12 vs. 11.05±4.40 at end of treatment in supine vs. prone position respectively. Mean NPRS score was 7.73±1.23 vs. 7.67±0.96 at start of treatment in supine vs. prone position respectively while it was 4.63±0.89 vs. 3.13±0.90 at the end of treatment in supine vs. prone position respectively. CONCLUSION: Lumbar traction in prone lying position is more effective than lumbar traction in supine lying position for the treatment of chronic lumbosacral radiculopathy.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8377889
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Professional Medical Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-83778892021-09-01 Effectiveness of mechanical traction in supine versus prone lying position for lumbosacral radiculopathy Khan, Rehan Ramzan Riaz, Saima Rashid, Sajid Sulman, Muhammad Pak J Med Sci Original Article OBJECTIVES: To determine the effectiveness of mechanical traction in supine versus prone lying position for lumbosacral radiculopathy. METHODS: A quasi experimental trial was conducted from April to September 2020 among sixty patients of chronic lumbosacral radiculopathy at Ibn e Siena Hospital, Multan. Participants were divided into two groups. Group-A (Supine) participants received lumbar traction in supine lying along with conventional treatment. Group-B (Prone) underwent the same treatment except the lumbar traction being applied in prone lying position. Participants were evaluated twice: at pre- treatment (week 0) and at the post treatment (week 2). Oswestry Disability Index and Numeric Pain Rating Scale were used as outcome measure. Data was analyzed on SPSS 23. RESULTS: The mean (±S.D) age of the patients was 39±5.7 vs. 40±5.3 years in supine vs. prone group respectively. Mean ODI score was 25.2±6.13 vs. 26.0±6.26 at the start of treatment in supine vs. prone position respectively while it was 19.45±7.12 vs. 11.05±4.40 at end of treatment in supine vs. prone position respectively. Mean NPRS score was 7.73±1.23 vs. 7.67±0.96 at start of treatment in supine vs. prone position respectively while it was 4.63±0.89 vs. 3.13±0.90 at the end of treatment in supine vs. prone position respectively. CONCLUSION: Lumbar traction in prone lying position is more effective than lumbar traction in supine lying position for the treatment of chronic lumbosacral radiculopathy. Professional Medical Publications 2021 /pmc/articles/PMC8377889/ /pubmed/34475929 http://dx.doi.org/10.12669/pjms.37.5.4200 Text en Copyright: © Pakistan Journal of Medical Sciences https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Khan, Rehan Ramzan
Riaz, Saima
Rashid, Sajid
Sulman, Muhammad
Effectiveness of mechanical traction in supine versus prone lying position for lumbosacral radiculopathy
title Effectiveness of mechanical traction in supine versus prone lying position for lumbosacral radiculopathy
title_full Effectiveness of mechanical traction in supine versus prone lying position for lumbosacral radiculopathy
title_fullStr Effectiveness of mechanical traction in supine versus prone lying position for lumbosacral radiculopathy
title_full_unstemmed Effectiveness of mechanical traction in supine versus prone lying position for lumbosacral radiculopathy
title_short Effectiveness of mechanical traction in supine versus prone lying position for lumbosacral radiculopathy
title_sort effectiveness of mechanical traction in supine versus prone lying position for lumbosacral radiculopathy
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8377889/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34475929
http://dx.doi.org/10.12669/pjms.37.5.4200
work_keys_str_mv AT khanrehanramzan effectivenessofmechanicaltractioninsupineversuspronelyingpositionforlumbosacralradiculopathy
AT riazsaima effectivenessofmechanicaltractioninsupineversuspronelyingpositionforlumbosacralradiculopathy
AT rashidsajid effectivenessofmechanicaltractioninsupineversuspronelyingpositionforlumbosacralradiculopathy
AT sulmanmuhammad effectivenessofmechanicaltractioninsupineversuspronelyingpositionforlumbosacralradiculopathy