The evaluating of efficacy of McKenzie exercises, Massage and foot Reflexology on pain and disability of men with mechanical chronic low back pain

Authors

  • Roozbeh Sanadgol DQ-CCNE/UFSM
  • Ahmad Ebrahimi Atri
  • Seyd Ali Akbar Hashemi Javaheri

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5902/2179460X20755

Abstract

Chronic low-back pain (CLBP) affects most people at some point in their lives. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficiency of 3 methods which are popular and known as non-invasive way in rehabilitation of CLBP. 60 men in age of group 25-45 with CLBP were randomly divided into four groups (McKenzie, massage, reflexology and control) and instructed to perform McKenzie exercise for 8 week, massage and foot reflexology for 10 days. Patient were assessed by McGill pain questioner (MPQ) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), based on pain feeling and the ability to do routine activity of life before starting the study (Pre-test Data) and at the end of study procedure (post-test Data). Results were analyzed by Paired T test, one way ANOVA and Tukey post hock. There was no significantly difference in Pre-treatment session between the 4 groups. MPQ and ODI were significantly lower in post-treatment sessions as compared to pre-treatment values in experimental groups (McKenzie, massage and foot reflexology). Significant decrease in MPQ and ODI values were found in all experimental groups, but no difference in efficacy were found between these groups. However the result that reach from comparison between each of experimental group and control group, showed that the experimental groups were significantly effective. McKenzie exercise, massage and foot reflexology in men with mechanical chronic low-back pain reduce pain and improved disability. Researchers were not found any differences between these 3 methods as compare with each other. Due to the results, Authors suggest that may be using massage therapy or foot reflexology, for patients with CLBP, is better and more effective if therapists are looking for treating in shortest possible duration.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Downloads

Published

2015-12-19

How to Cite

Sanadgol, R., Atri, A. E., & Javaheri, S. A. A. H. (2015). The evaluating of efficacy of McKenzie exercises, Massage and foot Reflexology on pain and disability of men with mechanical chronic low back pain. Ciência E Natura, 37, 69–75. https://doi.org/10.5902/2179460X20755

Issue

Vol. 37 (2015): SPECIAL EDITION - PART 2

Section

Special Edition

License

To access the DECLARATION AND TRANSFER OF COPYRIGHT AUTHOR’S DECLARATION AND COPYRIGHT LICENSE click here.

 

Ethical Guidelines for Journal Publication

The Ciência e Natura journal is committed to ensuring ethics in publication and quality of articles. 

Conformance to standards of ethical behavior is therefore expected of all parties involved: Authors, Editors, Reviewers, and the Publisher.

In particular, 

Authors: Authors should present an objective discussion of the significance of research work as well as sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the experiments. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review Articles should also be objective, comprehensive, and accurate accounts of the state of the art. The Authors should ensure that their work is entirely original works, and if the work and/or words of others have been used, this has been appropriately acknowledged. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Authors should not submit articles describing essentially the same research to more than one journal. The corresponding Author should ensure that there is a full consensus of all Co-authors in approving the final version of the paper and its submission for publication.

Editors: Editors should evaluate manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit. An Editor must not use unpublished information in the editor's own research without the express written consent of the Author. Editors should take reasonable responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper.

Reviewers: Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should be conducted objectively, and observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments, so that Authors can use them for improving the paper. Any selected Reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the Editor and excuse himself from the review process. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.