Nörolojik defisiti olmayan bel ağrılı hastalarda farklı bantlama tekniklerinin yaşam kalitesi ve ağrı üzerine etkisi

Year 2014, Volume: 1 Issue: 1 - Volume: 1 Issue: 1, 26 - 34, 23.07.2016

Deniz İnanoğlu Gül Baltacı

Abstract

Amaç: Fizyoterapide bantlama tekniklerinin bel kaslarını desteklediği ve ağrıyı azalttığı, yaşam kalitesini etkilediği bilinmektedir. Bu çalışmada nörolojik defisiti olmayan bel problemlerinde bantlama tekniklerinin ağrı ve yaşam kalitesi üzerine etkileri araştırıldı. Ayrıca, farklı bant materyalinin ağrı ve yaşam kalitesi üzerine etkileri de araştırıldı. Yöntem: Çalışmaya nörolojik defisiti olmayan, bel ağrısı bulunan, yaşları 20 ile 65 yıl arasında değişen 60 gönüllü alındı. Hastalar 3 eşit gruba ayrıldı. 1. grup Rijit bant grubu (N=20, 12 kadın, 8 erkek), 2. grup Plasebo grubu (N=20, 17 kadın, 3 erkek), 3. grup Kinezyo bantlama grubu (N=20, 11 kadın, 9 erkek) olarak belirlendi. Bantlama tedavisi her 3 gruba 2 hafta boyunca, haftada 3 gün aynı fizyoterapist tarafından yapıldı. Gruplara fizyoterapi öncesi ve sonrasında Roland Morris Yaşam Kalitesi Anketi, 10 cm-görsel analog skalası, gonyometre ile lumbar eklem hareket genişliği (fleksiyon, ekstansiyon, sağa ve sola lateral fleksiyon), gövde fleksiyonu ve el-yer mesafesi ölçülüp kaydedildi. Bulgular: Gruplar arasında demografik veriler yönünden fark yoktu (p>0.05). Bantlama öncesi ve sonrası plasebo grubunda VAS değerleri dışında (p0.05). Rijit bant grubu ise plasebo grubundan daha iyi sonuçlar verdi. Kinezyo bantlama grubu yaşam kalitesi, ağrı ve el-yer mesafesinde en iyi sonuçları verdi (p

Keywords

Bel ağrısı, Bantlama, Yaşam kalitesi

Effects of different taping techniques on quality of life and pain in low back pain patients without any neurological deficits

Abstract

Purpose: The taping techniques in physical therapy are known to support low back muscles, decrease pain, and affect quality of quality. The purpose of this study was to assess the effect of using taping techniques on pain and the quality of life in lumbar problems without neurological deficits, and to determine the effect of different taping techniques and different taping materials. Methods: Sixty volunteers without any neurological deficiency, with lumbar pain, aged between 20 and 65 years were included in the study. Patients were divided into 3 equal groups. First group was defined as group Mc Connell tape (N=20, 12 female, 8 male), 2nd group as group placebo (N=20, 17 female, 3 male), and 3rd group as group Kinesio Taping (N=20, 11 female, 9 male). Taping therapies were done by the same physical therapist 3 times a week, for 2 weeks in all 3 groups. In all groups, RolandMorris Life Quality Query, 10 cm visual analogue scale (VAS), lumbar range of motion (flexion, extension, and lateral flexion to right and left), using goniometer, trunk flexion, and hand-ground distances were measured and recorded before and following physiotherapy. Results: No difference was found regarding demographic data among the groups (p>0.05). When comparing pre-taping and post-taping VAS scores, a significant difference was found in the placebo group (p<0.05), whereas no difference was found in other data (p>0.05). Group Kinesiotaping had the best results in quality of life, pain, and hand-ground distance. Conclusion: Taping therapy has positive effects on pain and quality of life in low back problems without neurological deficiency. When compared to rigid taping and placebo Kinesio Taping was found to be more effective

Keywords

Lumbar pain, Taping, Quality of life

References

• 1. Bhargavaa A, Gelba D, Ludwiga S, et al. Physical therapy in low back pain. Curr Opin Orthop. 2006;17:199-207.
• 2. Bishop A, Foster NE. Do physical therapists in the United Kingdom recognize psychosocial factors in patients with acute low back pain? Spine. 2005;30:1316-1322.
• 3. Bekkering GE, Van Tulder MW, Hendriks EJ, et al. Implementation of clinical guidelines on physical therapy for patients with low back pain: randomized trial comparing patient outcomes after a standard and active implementation strategy. Phys Ther. 2005;85:544-555.
• 4. Papageorgiou AC, Croft PR, Ferry S, et al. Estimating the prevalence of low back pain in the general population: evidence from the South Manchester Back Pain Survey. Spine. 1995;20:1889-1894.
• 5. Defrin R, Ben Benyamin S, Aldubi RD, et al. Conservative correction of leg-length discrepancies of 10mm or less for the relief of chronic low back pain. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2005;86:2075-2080.
• 6. Narin S, Bozan Ö, Cankurtaran F, et al. Kronik bel ağrılı hastalarda fizyoterapi programının fonksiyonel kapasite ve yaşam kalitesi üzerine etkisi. Dokuz Eylül Tıp Dergisi 2008;22:13-143.
• 7. Aspden RMA, Porter RW. Lumbar spine disorders. World Scientific Publisching Co Pte Ltd, 1995;145-154.
• 8. Mc Gory RW, Webster BS, Hsiong S. The relation between pain intensity, disability and the episodic nature of chronic and recurrent low back pain. Spine. 2000;5:834-841.
• 9. Fritz JM, George S. The use of classification approach to identifty subgroups of patient with acute low back pain. Spine. 2000;25:106-114.
• 10. Moya F, Grau M, Riesho N, et al. Chronic low back pain: multispecialty assessment of 100 patients. Aten Primaria. 2000;26:239-244.
• 11. Magee DJ. Orthopedic Physical Assessment. Philadelphia: WB. Saunders Company, 1997;362-415.
• 12. Başaran S, Güzel R, Sarpel T. Yaşam kalitesi ve sağlık sonuçlarını değerlendirme ölçütleri. Romatizma. 2005;20:55-63.
• 13. Eker L, Tüzün EH, Daşkapan A, et al. Relationship between EQ-5D and SF-36 instruments in patients with low back pain. Fizyoter Rehabil. 2007;18:3-10.
• 14. Ay S, Evcik D. Kronik Bel Ağrılı Hastalarda Depresyon ve Yaşam Kalitesi. Yeni Tıp Dergisi. 2008;25:228-231.
• 15. Foster NE, Thompson KA, Baxter GD, et al. Management of nonspecific low back pain by physiotherapists in Britain and Ireland: a descriptive questionnaire of current clinical practice. Spine. 1999;24:1332-1342.
• 16. Gracey JH, McDonough SM, Baxter GD. Physiotherapy management of low back pain: a survey of current practice in Northern Ireland. Spine. 2002;27:406-411.
• 17. Constantinou M, Brown M. Therapeutic Taping for Musculoskeletal Conditions, Chapter 6:212- 216.
• 18. Çeliker R, Güven Z, Aydoğ T, et al. The Kinesiologic Taping Technique and its applications. Turk J Phys Med Rehab. 2011;57:225-35.
• 19. Kase K, Wallis J, Kase T. Clinical therapeutic application of the kinesiotaping method. Tokyo, Japan: Ken Ikai Co Ltd; 2003.
• 20. Stratford PW, Binkley J, Solomon P, et al. Defining the minimum level of detectable change for the Roland-Morris Questionnaire. Phys Ther. 1996;76:359-365.
• 21. Roland MO, Morris RW. A study of the natural history of back pain. Part 1: Development of a reliable and sensitive measure of disability in low back pain. Spine. 1983;8:141-144.
• 22. Razak Özdinçler A, Kubat E. Nörolojik defisiti olmayan mekanik kökenli bel ağrılarında farklı egzersiz yöntemlerinin etkinliği. Fizyoter Rehabil. 1998;9-10:7-8.
• 23. Price DD, McGrath PA, Rafii A, et al. The validation of visual analogue scales as ratio scale measures for chronic and experimental pain. Pain. 1983;17:45-56.
• 24. Hwang-Bo G, Lee JH. Effects of Kinesio taping in a physical therapist with acute low back pain due to patient handling: A case report. Int J Occup Med Environ Health. 2011;24:320-323.
• 25. Otman AS, Sade A. Tedavi Hareketlerinde Temel Değerlendirme Prensipleri. Ankara, 1995;73.
• 26. Slupik A, Dwornik M, Bialoszwski D, et al. Effect of Kinesio Taping on bioelectrical activity of vastus medialis muscle. Preliminary report. Ortop Traumatol Rehabil. 2007;9:644-651.
• 27. Vithoulka I, Beneka A, Malliou P, et al. The effects of Kinesio-Taping® on quadriceps strength during isokinetic exercise in healthy non athlete women. Isokinetics and Exercise Science. 2010;18:1-6.
• 28. Karatas N, Bicici S, Baltaci G, et al. The effect of kinesiotaping application on functional performance in surgeons who have musculoskeletal pain after performing surgery. Turk Neurosurg. 2012;22:83-89.
• 29. Yoshida A, Kahanov L. The effect of kinesio taping on lower trunk range of motions. Res Sports Med. 2007;15:103-12
• 30. Paoloni M, Bernetti A, Fratocchi G, et al. Kinesio taping applied to lumbar muscles influences clinical and electromyographic characteristics in chronic low back pain patients. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2011;47:237- 244.
• 31. Djordjevic OC, Vukicevic D, Katunac L, et al. Mobilization with movement and kinesiotaping compared with a supervised exercise program for painful shoulder: results of a clinical trial. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2012;35:454-463.
• 32. Thelen MD, Dauber JA, Stoneman PD. The clinical efficacy of kinesio tape for shoulder pain: a randomized, double-blinded, clinical trial. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2008;38:389- 395.
• 33. Morris D, Jones D, Ryan H, et al. The clinical effects of Kinesio® Tex taping: A systematic review. Physiother Theory Pract. 2013;29:259- 270.