Panacea Index Logo

Command Palette

Search for a command to run...

A comparative study of Thai massage and muscle energy technique for chronic neck pain: A single-blinded randomized clinical trial.

Journal of bodywork and movement therapies
July 1, 2021
Vitsarut Buttagat et al. (6 authors)
Journal ArticleRandomized Controlled TrialHuman StudyClinical
Study Details

Study Goal

The researchers aimed to compare the effects of Traditional Thai massage (TM) and the muscle energy (ME) technique on pain intensity, pressure pain threshold, neck disability, and neck flexion range of motion in patients with chronic neck pain associated with myofascial trigger points.

Results Summary

Both TM and ME techniques significantly improved all measured parameters compared to the control group, with no significant differences observed between the two interventions. The study concluded that both methods are practical alternatives for treating chronic neck pain associated with myofascial trigger points.

Population

Forty-five patients with chronic neck pain associated with myofascial trigger points.

Effective Dosage

Eight treatment sessions over two weeks.

Duration

Two weeks.

Interactions

None mentioned.

Extracted Claims (10)
InterventionDirectionEndpointPopulationDosageImpactClaim #
Traditional Thai massage (TM)
decrease
pain intensity (PI)
patients with chronic neck pain associated with myofascial trigger points (MTrPs)
-
resulted in a significant improvement
#1
Traditional Thai massage (TM)
increase
pressure pain threshold (PPT)
patients with chronic neck pain associated with myofascial trigger points (MTrPs)
-
resulted in a significant improvement
#2
Traditional Thai massage (TM)
decrease
neck disability (ND)
patients with chronic neck pain associated with myofascial trigger points (MTrPs)
-
resulted in a significant improvement
#3
Traditional Thai massage (TM)
increase
neck flexion range of motion (NFROM)
patients with chronic neck pain associated with myofascial trigger points (MTrPs)
-
resulted in a significant improvement
#4
muscle energy (ME) technique
decrease
pain intensity (PI)
patients with chronic neck pain associated with myofascial trigger points (MTrPs)
-
resulted in a significant improvement
#5
muscle energy (ME) technique
increase
pressure pain threshold (PPT)
patients with chronic neck pain associated with myofascial trigger points (MTrPs)
-
resulted in a significant improvement
#6
muscle energy (ME) technique
decrease
neck disability (ND)
patients with chronic neck pain associated with myofascial trigger points (MTrPs)
-
resulted in a significant improvement
#7
muscle energy (ME) technique
increase
neck flexion range of motion (NFROM)
patients with chronic neck pain associated with myofascial trigger points (MTrPs)
-
resulted in a significant improvement
#8
Traditional Thai massage (TM)
no change
all parameters
patients with chronic neck pain associated with myofascial trigger points (MTrPs)
-
no significant difference was observed
#9
muscle energy (ME) technique
no change
all parameters
patients with chronic neck pain associated with myofascial trigger points (MTrPs)
-
no significant difference was observed
#10
Abstract

BACKGROUND: Myofascial pain syndrome (MPS) is the most common form of muscle disorders. Traditional Thai massage (TM) and muscle energy (ME) technique have been used to treat patients with MPS for long time but head-to-head comparisons of these interventions have not been established. AIM: The aim of the current study was to compare the effects of TM and the ME technique on pain intensity (PI), pressure pain threshold (PPT), neck disability (ND), and neck flexion range of motion (NFROM) in patients with chronic neck pain associated with myofascial trigger points (MTrPs). DESIGN: A randomized, single-blinded clinical trial. SETTING: Department of Physical Therapy, School of Integrative Medicine, Mae Fah Luang University. POPULATION: Forty-five patients with chronic neck pain associated with MTrPs were recruited. METHODS: The patients were randomly allocated to the TM, ME, or control groups, with each having eight treatment sessions over a period of two weeks. PI, PPT, ND, and NFROM were assessed before, immediately after the first treatment session, and one day after the last treatment session. RESULTS: Based on the results, both TM and the ME technique resulted in a significant improvement in all parameters (p < 0.05) compared to the control group. Additionally, no significant difference was observed between TM and the ME technique in all parameters. CONCLUSIONS: The application of TM or the ME technique can be a practical alternative approach for the treatment of chronic neck pain associated with MTrPs.

Medical Subject Headings (MeSH)
Chronic PainHumansMassageMusclesMyofascial Pain SyndromesNeck PainPain ThresholdThailandTreatment OutcomeTrigger Points
Study Links
Quality Scores
SafetyNot Assessed
Efficacy85/10
Quality80/10
Citation Metrics
Total Citations9
Citations/Year2.3
Relative Citation Ratio1.62
NIH Percentile67.7%
Research Impact Scores
APT Score0.75
Weight Score2.45
Normalized Score0.70
Related Supplements
A comparative study of Thai massage and muscle energy techni... | Panacea Index