Manipulation and Myofascial Techniques On Sacroiliac Joint Dysfunction

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

COMPLETED

Clinical Phase

NA

Total Enrollment

56 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2023-06-01

Study Completion Date

2023-08-15

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

Aimed to compare the effects of High-Velocity Low-Amplitude (HVLA) manipulation and myofascial release techniques on performance in healthy individuals with sacroiliac joint dysfunction.

Related Clinical Trials

Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.

Effects of Dynamic Stabilizatıon Exercises and HVLA Manipulatıon in Low Back Paın

NCT06277700

Low Back Pain Neuromuscular Subluxation of Joint

COMPLETED NA

Immediate Effects of Two Spinal Manipulative Techniques

NCT05057091

Chronic Low-back Pain

COMPLETED NA

Comparison of the Effectiveness of Mobilization and Myofascial Release Techniques in Patients With Sacroiliac Joint Dysfunction

NCT07310368

Sacroiliac Joint Dysfunction

NOT_YET_RECRUITING NA

Sacroiliac Manipulation and Core Stability in Healthy Adults

NCT07244679

Health Adults Core Stabilization

COMPLETED NA

The Effect of Pelvic Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation Techniques in Patients With Sacroiliac Joint Dysfunction

NCT06366971

Sacroiliac Joint Dysfunction

COMPLETED NA

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

Aim: aimed to compare the effects of High-Velocity Low-Amplitude (HVLA) manipulation and myofascial release techniques on performance in healthy individuals with sacroiliac joint dysfunction. Design: Randomized control trial. Setting: University physiotherapy clinic. Participiants: Participants aged 18-45 years with confirmed Dysfunction by six clinical Sacroiliac Joint diagnostic tests. Intervention: The groups determined as randomly into the four groups. Group I (n=14) received HVLA spinal manipulation, Group II (n=14) underwent foam roller stretching, Group III (n=14) received a combination of HVLA spinal manipulation and foam roller stretching, and Group IV (n=14) underwent sham manipulation as the control group. Measures were measured before the acute intervention and right after the intervention. Outcomes: Prior to the interventions, participants were evaluated using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for pain assessment, the Baseline Sit and Reach test for flexibility assessment, the Optojump Next system (Via Stradivari, Bolzano) for vertical jump performance and multiple jump tests, and the MicroFet2 digital hand dynamometer (United States, Utah) for muscle strength measurement. Results: The study groups showed statistically significant improvements in performance parameters compared to the control group (p\<0.05). Pre-treatment and post-treatment performance parameters and pain values were statistically significant in both groups (p\<0.05). While performance improvements were observed in all four groups, the highest changes were generally observed in the HVLA + Myofascial release group. Conclusion: Considering the overall results, the combined use of HVLA and Myofascial release in the treatment protocol is recommended.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Manipulation, Psychologic Pain Performance Anxiety Participation, Patient Physiotherapists

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

PARALLEL

The groups determined as randomly into the four groups. Group I (n=14) received HVLA spinal manipulation, Group II (n=14) underwent foam roller stretching, Group III (n=14) received a combination of HVLA spinal manipulation and foam roller stretching, and Group IV (n=14) underwent sham manipulation as the control group. Measures were measured before the acute intervention and right after the intervention.

Primary Study Purpose

TREATMENT

Blinding Strategy

NONE

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

Group I

Group I (n=14) received HVLA spinal manipulation

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Comparing to Manipulation and Myofascial Release Techniques

Intervention Type OTHER

Randomized Controlled Trials

Group II

Group II (n=14) underwent foam roller stretching,

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Comparing to Manipulation and Myofascial Release Techniques

Intervention Type OTHER

Randomized Controlled Trials

Group III

Group III (n=14) received a combination of HVLA spinal manipulation and foam roller stretching,

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Comparing to Manipulation and Myofascial Release Techniques

Intervention Type OTHER

Randomized Controlled Trials

Group IV

Group IV (n=14) underwent sham manipulation as the control group

Group Type SHAM_COMPARATOR

Comparing to Manipulation and Myofascial Release Techniques

Intervention Type OTHER

Randomized Controlled Trials

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

Comparing to Manipulation and Myofascial Release Techniques

Randomized Controlled Trials

Intervention Type OTHER

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

1. Volunteer
2. Being between the ages of 18-45,
3. Not to have any psychological, neurological, orthopedic and rheumatic disorders,
4. Not having any other musculoskeletal pathology affecting the lower extremities,
5. Not having undergone spine and/or lower extremity surgery,
6. Those with mechanical sacroiliac joint pain,
7. Patients in whom at least 3 out of 6 provocation tests showing sacroiliac joint dysfunction and validity-reliability studies were positive: 1. Distraction, 2. Compression, 3. Gaenslen, 4. Posterior friction test, 5. Sacral thrust, 6. Faber (8) Individuals with sacroiliac pain at least 3 points on the VAS in the last 1 month 11

Exclusion Criteria

1. Being under the age of 18 and over the age of 45,
2. Having any psychological, neurological, orthopedic and rheumatic disorders,
3. Pregnancy and suspicion of pregnancy,
4. Having active malignancies,
5. Having an active infection,
6. Injection and operation of the sacroiliac joint in the last 3 months,
7. Having drug or substance addiction,
8. Central vascular/neurological conditions

Minimum Eligible Age

18 Years

Maximum Eligible Age

45 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes