COMPARISON OF THE EFFECTS OF TWO PHYSIOTHERAPY APPROACHES IN THE TREATMENT OF CERVICO-THORACIC SYNDROME
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.35120/medisij040441dKeywords:
Cervico-thoracic syndrome, physiotherapy, kinesitherapy, soft tissue mobilizationAbstract
Cervico-thoracic syndrome is extremely common in modern life, which motivated us to investigate it - specifically in the cervico-thoracic region. This condition is characterized by impaired posture, often resulting in pain, which is the most frequent complaint among affected individuals.
Objective: The aim of this study was to examine and compare the effects of selected physiotherapeutic interventions in the treatment of cervico-thoracic syndrome.
Materials and Methods: The study included 24 patients experiencing cervical pain accompanied by motor deficits and postural disturbances. Participants were divided into two groups: Group A (control) and Group B (experimental). Both groups underwent a physiotherapy program consisting of 10 sessions over 15 days. Group A (Control): Ultrasound therapy applied to the cervico-thoracic junction, medical massage of the cervico-thoracic region, post-isometric relaxation, and kinesitherapy. Group B (Experimental): Techniques for soft tissue mobilization in the form of manipulative massage, positional release techniques, and kinesitherapy. To assess treatment effectiveness, measurements were taken before and after therapy, including subjective pain assessment (VAS), Cervical mobility palpatory evaluation of muscle tone.
Results: Both therapeutic approaches demonstrated positive effects on patients’ conditions, with slightly better outcomes observed in the experimental group. Differences were noted across all measured parameters.
Conclusion: The application of soft tissue manipulation techniques combined with kinesitherapy has a beneficial effect on pain reduction, correction of muscle imbalance, and improvement of movement range and control. Restoration of normal function begins with pain control, which enables better and more accurate proprioception. These findings are consistent with previous research.
Downloads
References
Chang, D., Lui, A., Matsoyan, A., Safaee, M. M., Aryan, H., & Ames, C. (2024). Comparative review of the socioeconomic burden of lower back pain in the United States and globally. Neurospine, 21(2), 487–501. https://doi.org/10.14245/ns.2448372.186
Earls, J., & Myers, T. (2010). Fascial release for structural balance. Lotus Publishing.
Ferković, M., & Tapalović, M. (1998). Akupunktura. Školska knjiga d.d., Zagreb.
GBD 2021 Low Back Pain Collaborators. (2023). Global, regional, and national burden of low back pain, 1990–2020, its attributable risk factors, and projections to 2050: A systematic analysis of the Global Burden of Disease Study 2021. The Lancet Rheumatology, 5(6), e316–e329. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2665-9913(23)00098-X
Krstev, T. (2024). Функционална дијагноза на локомоторен апарат. Универзитет „Гоце Делчев“ Штип.
Lippert, S. L. (2018). Клиничка кинезиологија и анатомија (6th ed.). Нампрес.
Myers, T. W. (2009). Anatomy trains: Myofascial meridians for manual and movement therapists. Elsevier Limited.
Naigang, L. (2023). 10-Minute Tui Na Massage. Shanghai Press and Publishing Development Co., Ltd.
Simon, R., Greenberg, D., & Aminoff, M. (2011). Клиничка неврологија. Арс Ламина.
Vasileva, D. (2022). Основи на кинезитерапија. Универзитет „Гоце Делчев“ Штип.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
