Theses and dissertations (Health Sciences)
Permanent URI for this collectionhttp://ir-dev.dut.ac.za/handle/10321/12
Browse
10 results
Search Results
Item Study into the treatment of active myofascial trigger points using interferential current as an alternative to dry needling agitation(1995) Christie, Kevin Rodney; Kretzmann, HeidiThe aim of this study was to determine whether the use of Interferential Current provided a non-invasive alternative to Dry Needling Agitation in the treatment of Myofascial Pain and Dysfunction Syndrome. A randomised Experimental Method of Single- Variable design was undertaken using the before-and-after-withcontrol design.Item The relative effectiveness of action potential therapy compared to diclofenac sodium in the treatment of mechanical low back pain(2001) Bowers, Sonia Claire; Myburgh, CorneliusLow back pain is a major health problem worldwide, and considerable amounts of money are spent on a variety of practitioners including medical practitioners, chiropractors, osteopaths, physiotherapists and others. There is a lack of consensus among these groups regarding the most appropriate therapy or management for low back pain. This disparity leads to the meritable conclusion that more research is required to accurately identify solutions for the management of low back pain (Walker, 1997:95-96).Item A study of the effectiveness of relief pulse as compared to tens within the realm of chiropractic health care(1997) Buchholtz, Michael Allan; Mathews, M.The purpose of this study was to evaluate the .ost effective electrotherapy wavefore, in the treatment of mechanical low back pain, by comparing a Relief Pulse wavefor to that cf Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation wavefore, in combination with a chiropractic lumbar roll adjustment. This was accoaplished by means of objective and subjective assesmentsItem The effect of interferential current treatment duration on chronic low back pain(2017) Carim, Ahmed Abdul; Varatharajullu, DesireeBackground to the study: Chronic low back pain (CLBP) is a common musculoskeletal complaint, which results in increased absenteeism from work and other disabilities. Interferential current (IFC) is one of the treatment modalities used by manual and physical therapists to alleviate CLBP. Interferential current involves electrical stimulation of medium frequency using two currents that cross over each other. There have been numerous mechanisms proposed on how IFC works with regard to pain inhibition; however, these remain unconfirmed. Common theories include those based on the gate control theory of pain and integrated pain theories. Although the placement of the electrodes used in the IFC application has been well defined, the optimum treatment time for CLBP has not been well researched. Therefore, this study aimed to determine what protocol regarding the duration of IFC is most appropriate in the treatment of CLBP. Aim: The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of interferential current in the treatment of chronic low back pain using variable time intervals Methodology: This study was a randomised single-blinded clinical trial which consisted of 45 participants residing in the eThekwini municipality, divided into three groups of 15 each. The participants were randomly assigned using concealed allocation to one of three treatment groups of 15 each viz. 15, 20 or 30 minutes of interferential current (IFC). Low back pain level was determined using a numerical pain rating scale (NRS-101). Pain pressure thresholds (PPT) were measured with a pain pressure algometer. The effect of low back pain on participants’ activities of daily living was assessed using the Oswestry low back questionnaire (OLBQ).The participants received three treatments over a two week period with the fourth consultation being used for the final subjective and objective measurements a week later. Results: Repeated measures ANOVA testing was used to examine the intra-group effect of time and the inter-group effect of treatment on the outcomes of NRS-101 and algometer readings. Profile plots were used to assess the direction and trends of the effects. An intra-group analysis revealed that, objectively and subjectively, all groups responded positively to treatment over time, with no significant time-group interaction. Conclusion: This study concluded that neither group is more effective than the other with respect to participants’ pain perception and the OLBQ. However, groups one and three showed the largest individual improvement between consultation one and three, compared to group two which showed consistent improvement throughout for the NRS-101 readings. Based on the results collected from this study, the shortest time frame of 15 minutes of IFC application can be used in the treatment of CLBP.Item The efficacy of action potential therapy, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation and placebo in the treatment of osteoarthritis of the knee(2001) Naidoo, Seelan Sadasivasan Kisten; Myburgh, CorneliusOsteoarthritis (OA) is a disease that is localized to diarthodal joints and is characterized by degeneration of hyaline cartilage, with secondary changes in the peri-articular bone and soft tissue. OA is considered to be a sequale of traumatic and age respondent degenerative changes which result in loss of cartilage and impairment of function. The purpose of this investigation is to evaluate the relative efficacy of Action Potential Therapy, Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation and placebo in the treatment of Osteoarthritis of the knee. This was a prospective, randomized clinical trial consisting of sixty patients who volunteered from the greater Durban area. The patients diagnosed as having Osteoarthritis of the knee, were randomly divided into four treatment groups. Group one and two consisted of twenty patients each and group three and four consisted often patients each, all between the age of 40 - 65 years old. Group one received Action Potential therapy (APT); group two received Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation (TENS); group three received placebo APT and group four received placebo TENS. For statistical analysis parametric and non-parametric tests were used in all hypothesis Data capturing took place for all groups at the 1st, 2nd and 4th consultations. Subjective data was collected using the Numerical Pain Rating Scale-l Ol ; McGill Pain Questionaire and Western Ontario and MacMaster Universities Index (WOMAC). Objective data was gathered using the algometer and goniometer.Item The effectiveness of spinal manipulative therapy and trans-cutaneous electrical nerve stimulation versus spinal manipulative therapy and placebo trans-cutaneous electrical nerve stimulation in the treatment of mild to moderate chronic tension-type headache(2002) Fonseca, Shane Warren; Jones, Andrew D.Headaches have been described as the most common medical complaint in society (Dalessia 1987:3), and Tension-type headaches constitute approximately 80% of these (Martin 1993:22). Although Episodic tension-type headache is more prevalent than Chronic tension-type headache and may have a greater societal impact, Chronic tension-type headache has by far a greater individual impact (Schwartz et aI, 1998) on the patient. The exact causes of Chronic tension-type headaches are not known and, as a result, treatment is commonly symptomatic in nature and aimed at reducing pain. To date, treatment commonly involves the use of drugs and with it comes the threat of drug-induced side-effects (Bendtsen et aI, 1996). The purpose of this study was to investigate two non-pharmacological treatments in the management of Chronic tension-type headaches, namely the relative effectiveness of Spinal Manipulative Therapy (SMT) in conjunction with Trans-cutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation (TENS), as compared with SMT and placebo TENS. ABSTRACT It was hypothesized that SMT in conjunction with TENS would provide a greater immediate and short-term benefit in comparison to SMT and placebo TENS in the treatment of mildItem The effectiveness of interferential current therapy as an adjunct to manipulation in the treatment of acute mechanical low back pain(2002) Aaron, Mark; Kruger, BrianBackground: Low back pain is a common problem for which many conservative treatments are available. Spinal manipulation is considered one of the most effective of these treatments. Interferential therapy is widely used especially for pain control and often forms part of a treatment protocol. However, there is little clinical evidence to support this usage. Objective: The purpose of this investigation was to evaluate the effectiveness of interferential current therapy as an adjunct to manipulation in the treatment of acute mechanical low back pain in terms of subjective and objective measures. Methods: Sixty subjects suffering from acute mechanical low back pain were recruited through advertising and randomly divided into two groups with thirty patients each. Group A received manipulation and interferential therapy and group B received manipulation only. Both groups received 4 treatments and a follow-up consultation over a 2 week period. Subjective measurements were taken using the Numerical Rating Scale - 101and revised Oswestry low back pain questionnaire. Objective measurements were taken using an algometer and an orthopaedic rating scale. All measurements were taken before treatment on the first, third and fifth consultations. Statistical inter-group analysis was completed using the two sample unpaired t-test and the Mann-Whitney U-test. Friedman's T test was used to evaluate the intra-group information. The null hypothesis was rejected at a = 0.05 level of significance. Results: Both treatment groups A and B achieved a significant improvement in pain and disability over the treatment period. However, no significant differences in terms of pain and disability could be found between the two groups at any stage during, or at the end of the treatment period.Item The efficacy of action potential therapy, as well as the relative effectiveness of two different action potential therapy electrode placements (abdominal versus paraspinal) in the management of irritable bowel syndrome(2002) Von Senger, Ivor; Van der Meulen, Anthony G.The aim of this placebo-controlled\xB7 trial was to investigate the efficacy of action potential therapy (APT) versus placebo, and the relative effectiveness of abdominal versus paraspinal electrode placement, in the treatment of Irritable Bowel Syndrome (IBS). Convenience sampling was used to recruit sixty patients with IBS from the community. These patients were randomly divided into four groups (A, B, C and D). Each group consisted of 15 patients, aged between 20 and 69 years. Patients attended five consultations over three weeks. Treatment was given with either active or placebo APT during the first four consultations. The fifth consultation was for data collection only. Patients in group A and C both received active APT. In group A, the electrodes were placed over the abdomen, while in group C the electrodes were placed paraspinally. Patients in group Band 0 both received placebo APT using a placebo APT device. In group B, the electrodes were placed over the abdomen, while in group 0, the electrodes were placed paraspinally. The measures of efficacy were the IBS Quality of Life Questionnaire (IBS-QOl), the Shortform McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ) and the life line Stress Questionnaire (ll-SQ). Using these questionnaires, data was collected at the 1st. 3rd and s' consultations for each participant. The data was then analysed using the SPSS package. Assessment of intragroup and inter-group change was performed using Friedman's T-test and the Mann-Whitney U-Tests respectively. Analysis was performed at the 95% confidence level. Patients in all four groups showed a,n improvement in quality of life (measured by the IBSQOl), as well as in the perceived quantity of pain experienced (measured by the SF-MPQ), between initial and final consultations. As regards the patients' levels of stress (measured by the ll-SQ), there was no statistically significant improvement in any of the four groups between initial and final consultations. Inter-group comparison of the data showed a higher perceived quantity of pain in the active, paraspinally placed APT group (group C) at the first consultation when compared to both theItem An investigation into the relative effectiveness of Transeva and spinal manipulative therapy for mechanical low back pain(2009) Marshall, Caryn Natalie; White, Rowan; Korporaal, Charmaine MariaThe aim of this study was to investigate the relative effectiveness of Transeva and spinal manipulative therapy for mechanical low back pain. The objectives evaluated the effectiveness of only administering Transeva therapy alone, or Spinal manipulative therapy alone as well as Transeva therapy with Spinal manipulative therapy on mechanical low back pain with respect to the patients’ subjective and objective responses to the respective treatment group. The final objective was to correlate the subjective and objective data collected to determine the effectiveness of each of the therapies in comparison with another. Design: A sample of thirty patients diagnosed with mechanical low back pain were accepted into the study. These patients were randomly divided into three groups of 10, which received different treatment protocols for mechanical low back pain. Outcome Measure: The following outcomes were measured; a decrease in pain (measured with the Numerical Pain Rating Scale (NRS), a decrease in disability (measured with the Roland-Morris Questionnaire), a decrease in local tenderness (measured with the pressure Algometer) and an increase in lumbar range of motion (measured with the Inclinometer). The data was collected prior to treatment one, prior to treatment four and at the sixth follow-up visit. Results and Conclusion: All groups improved with the treatments they received; however, no single treatment was statistically better than any other treatment intervention tested. However, the Spinal manipulative therapy group had a statistically significant faster reduction in pain on the NRS readings with p=0.048.Item The effectiveness of spinal manipulation and interferential current therapy versus oral meloxicam and interferential current therapy in the treatment of acute mechanical low back pain(2003) Bekker-Smith, Carla; Van der Meulen, Anthony G.Low back pain is one of the largest known causes of disability in western society. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the relative effectiveness of combined spinal manipulation and interferential current therapy versus combined oral meloxicam and interferential current therapy in the treatment of acute mechanical low back pain.