الفهرس 
Cupping versus kinesiotape on management of patients with sacroiliac joint dysfunction
AbstractOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 106 |  |  |
| | | from | 106 | | |
Abstract
Background. Non-invasive treatment options for sacroiliac joint dysfunction (SIJD) mediated pain are the first-choice treatment, and most patients with sacroiliac joint pain are managed conservatively with a combination of physical therapy, manual therapy, and oral medications. Aim of the study: This study was conducted to compare the effect of cupping therapy combined with conventional therapy, kinesiotap combined with conventional therapy and conventional therapy alone on pain, lumber flexion and extension range of motion (Flex, Ext. ROM) and functional disability in subjects with SIJ dysfunction. Subjects and procedure: Forty-five patients from both sexes were randomly selected from an outpatient orthopedic clinic in hospitals of Egyptian ministry of Health (Ain Alseera Medical center). Their age ranged from 30-55 years (42.1± 7.31). Subjects were divided equally into three groups (15 patients for each). group (A), (cupping therapy and conventional therapy), group (B), (Kinesiotape and conventional therapy), and group (C), (conventional therapy) only. All groups received their treatment for three months, cupping therapy applied once/week, kinesiotape applied two times/week and conventional therapy 3 sessions/week. The outcome measures were pain intensity level measured by visual analogue scale) VAS), lumber flexion and extension range of motion were measured by Modified - Modified schober test (MMST), and Arabic version of oswestry Disability Index (ODI) to measure the disability related to SIJD. All variables were measured pre and post treatment. Results. Mixed MANOVA test was showed that there were statistically significant differences among the three groups in all variables (p< 0.001). The multiple pairwise comparisons (LSD) Post Hoc test for VAS, ROM flex., ROM ext. and ODI showed no statistically significant differences in the measurements post treatment between group A and B, P< 0.194, 0.99, 0.052, 0.71 respectively