PRT vs MET in Non-Specific Low Back Pain With Facet Restriction

Positional Release Technique Versus Muscle Energy Technique For Patients With Non-Specific Low Back Pain With Facet Joint Restriction

Objective:The study aimed to compare the effectiveness of Positional Release Technique (PRT) and Muscle Energy Technique (MET) in reducing pain and improving outcomes for patients suffering from non-specific low back pain (NSLBP).

Materials and Methods: Thirty-six patients between the ages of 25 and 50, all referred by an orthopedic surgeon for treatment of non-specific low back pain (NSLBP), were enrolled in the study. Participants were randomly allocated into two groups (n=18 per group) using a computer-generated randomization sequence. However, details regarding allocation concealment and blinding of participants or assessors were not specified, which may influence the risk of bias. Group A received Positional Release Technique (PRT), while Group B received Muscle Energy Technique (MET). Prior to each treatment session, both groups received a standardized 15-minute hot pack application as a co-intervention to promote muscle relaxation and ensure consistency across interventions. Pain intensity was assessed using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), and functional outcomes were measured with the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMQ). Participants in both groups attended three physiotherapy sessions per week over a four-week treatment period.

1. Study Identification

   Official Title:

   Positional Release Technique Versus Muscle Energy Technique for Patients with Non-Specific Low Back Pain With Facet Joint Restriction

   Brief Title:

   PRT vs MET in Non-Specific Low Back Pain

   Study Type:

   Interventional (Clinical Trial)

   Phase:

   Not Applicable

2. Study Description

   Brief Summary:

   This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of Positional Release Technique (PRT) and Muscle Energy Technique (MET) in reducing pain and improving outcomes for patients suffering from non-specific low back pain with suspected facet joint dysfunction. Thirty-six patients were randomized into two groups and received treatment for 4 weeks, 3 sessions per week. Pain intensity (VAS) and functional disability (Roland-Morris Questionnaire) were assessed pre- and post-intervention.

3. Study Design

   Allocation: Randomized

   Intervention Model: Parallel Assignment

   Masking: None (Open Label)

   Primary Purpose: Treatment

4. Conditions & Interventions

   Condition:

   Non-Specific Low Back Pain (NSLBP)

   Interventions:

   Group A (PRT): Positional Release Technique - 3 sessions/week for 4 weeks with hot pack co-intervention.

   Group B (MET): Muscle Energy Technique - 3 sessions/week for 4 weeks with hot pack co-intervention.

5. Outcome Measures

   Primary Outcome Measures:

   Pain intensity (VAS) - Baseline and after 4 weeks.

   Functional disability (Roland-Morris Questionnaire, RMQ) - Baseline and after 4 weeks.

6. Eligibility

   Ages Eligible for Study: 25-50 years

   Sexes Eligible for Study: All

   Inclusion Criteria: Chronic NSLBP >3 months, suspected facet joint dysfunction.

   Exclusion Criteria: History of spinal surgery, vertebral fracture, osteoporosis, inflammatory/metabolic bone disease, spondylolisthesis.

7. Enrollment

   Enrollment: 36 participants (actual)

8. Locations

Maqassed Hospital, East Jerusalem, Palestine

Inclusion criteria:

• Participants in the age category of 25 to 50 years old.
• both male and female, with a diagnosis of low back pain (LBP), with or without referred leg pain.
• chronic LBP lasting more than three months.

Exclusion criteria:

• Osteoporosis.
• bone disease.
• Spondylolisthesis.
• History of vertebral fracture.
• History of spinal surgery.