The Effect of Mulligan’s Mobilization with Movement versus Dry Needling on Pain, Function, and Range of Motion among Athletes with Hip Adductor Related Groin Pain and Dysfunction

Simple item page
creativework.keywordsMulligan’s, Mobilization ,versus Dryen
dc.contributor.authorAyman Khader Saleem Salemen
dc.contributor.authorأيمن خضر سليم سالمar
dc.date.accessioned2022-12-10T13:49:07Z
dc.date.available2022-12-10T13:49:07Z
dc.date.issued2021-08-17
dc.description.abstractIII Abstract Background Injuries are considered a common challenge in the sports field, 31% of the injuries are muscular, especially in the lower extremities. Injuries in the groin area are a major and serious problem because they are common, lead to prolonged symptoms, and had a high recurrence rate. Study objective This study aims to highlight and investigate the effectiveness of two common management practices in physiotherapy, dry needling DN intervention as a soft tissue technique and Mulligan mobilization with movements MWM as a joint technique. Methods A convenience sampling of thirty football players who were diagnosed with hip adductorrelated groin pain and dysfunction were recruited from different cities in the west bank who participated in this randomized clinical trial, the participants were randomly divided into two groups, the dry needling group (15), and dry needling combined with Mulligan mobilization MWM (15). Numiric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS), Five-Second Copenhagen Squeeze test, Hip Abduction Range of Motion, Adductor Squeeze Test, Flexion Abduction External Rotation Test (FABER), Y Balance Test, and The Copenhagen Hip and Groin Outcome Score (HAGOS) were used as outcome measures (NPRS and 5-second squeeze test performed each session for the two groups). Results There was a significant improvement in NPRS, ROM, adductor squeeze test, 5 seconds squeeze test, Y balance test, FABER test, and HAGOS score on both groups between the pre, mid, and post-treatment (p < 0.05), at the same time, both DN and DN&MWM were equally effective and there was no significant differences in the effect between both interventions. Conclusion Both DN and DN&MWM were equally effective in improving the above-mentioned clinical variables and can be considered as an effective method in the treatment and management of hip adductor-related groin pain and dysfunction. IV For further similar research comparing mulligan mobilization only versus dry needling or conventional treatment and considering the effect of using a parallel technique like a physical agent in augmentation the aimed results are recommended. also testing the effect of both interventions on add muscle like the EMG. Also, the researcher recommended the call for a unified protocol and guidelines for adductors-related groin pain assessment and management protocol.
dc.identifier.urihttps://dspace.alquds.edu/handle/20.500.12213/7293
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherAl-Quds Universityen
dc.titleThe Effect of Mulligan’s Mobilization with Movement versus Dry Needling on Pain, Function, and Range of Motion among Athletes with Hip Adductor Related Groin Pain and Dysfunctionen
dc.titleتأثير العلاج اليدوي بطريقة موليغان مقارنة بالإبر الجافة على الألم والوظيفة والمدى الحركي لدى الرياضيين المصابين باضطرابات المنطقة المغبنية والعضلة الضامة للفخذar
dc.typeThesis
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
The Effect of Mulligan’s Mobilization with Movement versus Dry Needling on Pain.pdf
Size:
2.2 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Download
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.61 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description:
Download
Collections
Physiotherapy