Effectiveness of the Muscle Energy Technique versus Osteopathic Manipulation in the Treatment of Sacroiliac Joint Dysfunction in Athletes

Urko José García-Peñalver, María Victoria Palop-Montoro, David Manzano-Sánchez, Urko José García-Peñalver, María Victoria Palop-Montoro, David Manzano-Sánchez

Abstract

Background: The study of injuries stemming from sacroiliac dysfunction in athletes has been discussed in many papers. However, the treatment of this issue through thrust and muscle-energy techniques has hardly been researched. The objective of our research is to compare the effectiveness of thrust technique to that of energy muscle techniques in the resolution of sacroiliac joint blockage or dysfunction in middle-distance running athletes.

Methods: A quasi-experimental design with three measures in time (pre-intervention, intervention 1, final intervention after one month from the first intervention) was made. The sample consisted of 60 adult athletes from an Athletic club, who were dealing with sacroiliac joint dysfunction. The sample was randomly divided into three groups of 20 participants (43 men and 17 women). One intervention group was treated with the thrust technique, another intervention group was treated with the muscle-energy technique, and the control group received treatment by means of a simulated technique. A prior assessment of the range of motion was performed by means of a seated forward flexion test, a standing forward flexion test, and the Gillet test. After observing the dysfunction, the corresponding technique was performed on each intervention group. The control group underwent a simulated technique. A second intervention took place a month later, in order to ascertain possible increased effectiveness.

Results: Statistically significant differences were found between the muscle energy technique (MET) and muscle energy groups compared with the placebo group in both interventions (p = 0.000), with a significant reduction in positive dysfunction (initially 20 in all groups, eight in MET group, and two in thrust group in the final intervention). Comparing the changes in time, only the thrust group obtained statistically significant differences (p = 0.000, with a reduction of positive dysfunction, starting at 20 positives, five positive in the initial intervention and two positive in the final intervention) and when comparing both techniques, it was observed that between the first intervention and the final intervention, the thrust technique was significantly higher than the MET technique (p = 0.032).

Conclusions: The thrust manipulation technique is more effective in the treatment of sacroiliac dysfunction than the energy muscle technique, in both cases obtaining satisfactory results with far middle-distance running athletes. Finally, the thrust technique showed positive results in the first intervention and also in the long term, in contrast to the MET technique that only obtained changes after the first intervention.

Keywords: athletics; joint mobilization; muscle energy technique; sacroiliac joint dysfunction; thrust.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Chronological line of intervention.

References

    1. Vleeming A., Schuenke M.D., Masi A.T., Carreiro J.E., Danneels L., Willard F.H. The sacroiliac joint: An overview of its anatomy, function and potential clinical implications. J. Anat. 2012;221:537–567. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-7580.2012.01564.x.
    1. De Andrés Ares J., Roca Amatriaín G., Perucho González A., Nieto C., López D. Bloqueo y radiofrecuencia de la articulación sacroilíaca. Rev. Soc. Esp. Dolor. 2012;19:335–345.
    1. Katz V., Schofferman J., Reynolds J. The sacroiliac joint: A potential cause of pain after lumbar fusion to the sacrum. Clin. Spine Surg. 2003;16:96–99. doi: 10.1097/00024720-200302000-00015.
    1. Cohen S.P. Sacroiliac joint pain: A comprehensive review of anatomy, diagnosis, and treatment. Anesth. Analg. 2005;101:1440–1453. doi: 10.1213/01.ANE.0000180831.60169.EA.
    1. Acevedo González J.C., Quintero S.T. Escala de diagnóstico (SI5) de disfunción de la articulación sacroiliaca: Estudio piloto. Rev. Soc. Esp. Dolor. 2014;21:123–130. doi: 10.4321/S1134-80462014000300002.
    1. Slipman C., Whyte W., Chow D., Chou L., Lenrow D., Ellen M. Sacroiliac join syndrome. Pain Physician. 2001;4:143–152.
    1. Nejati P., Safarcherati A., Karimi F. Effectiveness of exercise therapy and manipulation on sacroiliac joint dysfunction: A randomized controlled trial. Pain Physician. 2019;22:53–61.
    1. Peebles R., Jonas C.E. Sacroiliac joint dysfunction in the athlete: Diagnosis and management. Curr. Sports Med. Rep. 2017;16:336–342. doi: 10.1249/JSR.0000000000000410.
    1. Hinrichs H.U. Libro de lesiones deportivas. Barcelona. Editorial Hispano Europea, 1999s. [(accessed on 10 December 2019)]; Available online: .
    1. Yavuz F., Kelle B., Balaban B. The interventional pain management of sacroiliac joint pain: A brief review. J. Adv. Neurosci. Res. 2015;2:25–29. doi: 10.15379/2409-3564.2015.02.02.5.
    1. Sarkar M., Goyal M., Samuel A.J. Comparing the effectiveness of the muscle energy technique and kinesiotaping in mechanical sacroiliac joint dysfunction: A non-blinded, two-group, pretest-posttest randomized clinical trial protocol. Asian Spine J. 2020;30 doi: 10.31616/asj.2019.0300.
    1. Kamali F., Shokri E. The effect of two manipulative therapy techniques and their outcome in patients with sacroiliac joint syndrome. J. Bodyw. Mov. Ther. 2012;16:29–35. doi: 10.1016/j.jbmt.2011.02.002.
    1. Zelle B.A., Gruen G.S., Brown S., George S. Sacroiliac joint dysfunction: Evaluationand management. Clin. J. Pain. 2005;21:446–455. doi: 10.1097/01.ajp.0000131413.07468.8e.
    1. Brolinson P.G., Kozar A.J., Cibor G. Sacroiliac joint dysfunction in athletes. Curr. Sports Med. Rep. 2003;2:47–56. doi: 10.1249/00149619-200302000-00009.
    1. Freitas J.P. Influência da Manipulação Osteopática Sacroilíaca Sobre a Pressão Plantar e Oscilação Corporal Através do Sistema de Baropodometria e Estabilometria. Universidade do Vale do Paraíba. Instituto de Pesquisa e Desenvolvimento. São José dos Campos; Sao Paulo, Brazil: 2010.
    1. Van der Wurff P., Hagmeijer R.H., Meyne W. Clinical tests of the sacroiliac joint. A systematic methodological review. Part I: Reliability. Man. Ther. 2000;5:30–36. doi: 10.1054/math.1999.0228.
    1. Van der Wurff P., Meyne W., Hagmeijer R.H.M. Clinical tests of the sacroiliac joint. A systematic methodological review. Part II: Validity. Man. Ther. 2000;5:89–96. doi: 10.1054/math.1999.0229.
    1. Mathew R., Srivastava N., Joshi S. A study to compare the effectiveness of MET and joint mobilization along with conventional physiotherapy in the management of SI joint dysfunction in young adults. Indian J. Physiother. Occup. Ther. 2015;9:203–208. doi: 10.5958/0973-5674.2015.00124.0.
    1. De Coux G., Curtil P. Tratado Práctico de Osteopatía Estructural. 1st ed. Paidotribo; Barcelona, España: 2019.
    1. Lozano-Quijada C., Poveda-Pagán E.J., Munuera-Verdú C. Disfunción sacroiliaca: Fiabilidad y validez de los test de diagnóstico. Revisión bibliográfica Sacroiliac joint dysfunction: Reliability and validity of diagnostic test. Rev. Fisioter. 2010;9:15–21.
    1. Ricard F., Sallé J.-L. Tratado de Osteopatía. 4rd ed. Medos Edición; Madrid, España: 2014.
    1. Anderson D. Muscle energy technique for joint mobilisation. Co-Kinetic J. 2016;67:1–41.
    1. Patel P., Patel N., Rathod V. Effectiveness of manipulation and muscle energy techniques in subjects with SI joint dysfunction. Int. J. Pharm. Pharm. Sci. 2015;5:16–29.
    1. Santos Junior E. Análise Baropodométrica da Influência da Técnica Manipulativa Osteopática de Correção Sacroilíaca na Distribuição da Pressão Plantar. Universidade do Vale do Paraíba. Instituto de Pesquisa e Desenvolvimento. São José dos Campos; Sao Paulo, Brazil: 2007.
    1. Pinto Aguilar Peres C., Risso L., Uchida de Oliveira L. Effects of manipulation of the ilium in weight-bearing hindfoot in patients with sacroiliac joint dysfunction. Man. Ther. 2011;9:150–164.
    1. Bindra S. A study on the efficacy of muscle energy technique as compared to conventional therapy on lumbar spine range of motion in chronic low back pain of sacroiliac origin. Hum. Bio. Rev. 2013;2:336–349.
    1. Barbosa A.C., Martins F.L., Barbosa M.C., Dos Santos R.T. Manipulation and selective exercises decrease pelvic anteversion and low-back pain: A pilot study. J. Back Musculoskelet. Rehabil. 2013;26:33–36. doi: 10.3233/BMR-2012-0347.

Source: PubMed

3
Sottoscrivi