Posted Date : 07th Mar, 2025
Peer-Reviewed Journals List: A Guide to Quality Research Publications ...
Posted Date : 07th Mar, 2025
Choosing the right journal is crucial for successful publication. Cons...
Posted Date : 27th Feb, 2025
Why Peer-Reviewed Journals Matter Quality Control: The peer revie...
Posted Date : 27th Feb, 2025
The Peer Review Process The peer review process typically follows sev...
Posted Date : 27th Feb, 2025
What Are Peer-Reviewed Journals? A peer-reviewed journal is a publica...
Effectiveness of Mechanical Cervical Traction with Neck Isometric Exercise in Patient with Cervical Radiculopathy
Author Name : A. K. M. Rezwan, Dibakar Barua, Nazia Ahmed, Ashfak Ahamad, Sadman Rownak, Habibullah
ABSTRACT
Background:Cervical radiculopathy, in which nerve roots are compressed by herniated discs, spondylolysis or bone spurs, causes pain, numbness, and motor weakness in the upper limbs and neck.
Objectives: The purpose of the study was to examine the effectiveness of cervical traction with neck isometric exercise in patients with cervical radiculopathy.
Methodology: In this quasi-experimental study, 30 patients diagnosed with cervical radiculopathy were randomly assigned into two groups.In both the experimental and control groups (n=15), mechanical cervical traction with neck exercise was applied to both groups, whereas manual cervical traction was applied to the control group once a day for four weeks.Measures of outcome included the Visual analog scale (VAS) and the Neck Disability Questionnaire (NDQ).In both groups, paired t-tests were used to compare pre and posttest results.Those who met the inclusion and exclusion criteria were included.
Results: Data was collected on a data sheet & encoded for computer analysis using SPSS version 29.The statistical analysis of post values of Group A (Mechanical cervical traction with neck isometric exercise) where VAS mean of pretest (7.20 ± 1.01) and posttest (3.47 ± 1.46) value (where t=8.143 and p < 0.0001). NDQ mean of pretest (37.67±10.43) and posttest (15.93 ±7.20) Value(where t=6.6422 and p < 0.0001). In group B (Manual cervical traction) where VAS mean of pretest (6.87 ± 1.06) and posttest (5.07 ± 1.16) value where (where t=4.4302 and p < 0.0001). NDQ mean of pretest (38.67±11.13) and posttest (26.67 ±9.43) value (where t=3.1863 and p < 0.0035).
Conclusion: Both techniques were found to be effective, but Manual cervical traction was more effective than mechanical cervical traction.
Keywords: Pain, Exercise, Mechanical traction, Manual Traction, Cervical Rediculopathy.