Effect of instrument assisted soft tissue mobilization versus kinesiotape for chronic mechanical low back pain: a randomized controlled trial

Abstract

IntroductionThe primary purpose was to compare the effect of conventional program, instrument assisted soft tissue mobilization (IASTM) and kinesiotape (KT) in patients with chronic mechanical low back pain (CMLBP).Methods51 participants were randomly enrolled into three equal groups. Group A (<i>n</i> = 17) received conventional program, Group B (<i>n</i> = 17) received conventional program plus IASTM, and Group C (<i>n</i> = 17) received conventional program plus KT. The participants were evaluated before and after eight sessions using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), pressure algometer, dual inclinometer, and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI).ResultsBetween pre-treatment and post-treatment, the three groups demonstrated a significant pain reduction (57.2%, 61.2%, and 57.77%; <i>p</i> < 0.0001), a significant increase in pain pressure threshold (PPT) [right (Rt): 56%, 53.2%, and 35.6%; left (Lt): 49%, 50.55%, and 41.36%; <i>p</i> < 0.0001], a significant improvement in the range of motion (ROM) (flexion: 38.59%, 43.55%, and 35.7%; extension: 72.4%, 88.73%, and 65.56%; Rt lateral flexion: 79.05%, 78.03%, and 55.42%; Lt lateral flexion: 85.33%, 96.37%, and 64.66%; Rt rotation 135%, 116.5%, and 188.48%; Lt rotation: 203%, 140.48%, and 224.24%; <i>p</i> < 0.0001), and a significant improvement in the functional disability index (56.8%, 49.55%, and 46.99%; <i>p</i> < 0.0001). No significant difference in pain, PPT, ROM and function was found among the three groups.ConclusionsConventional program, IASTM and KT are effective methods for improving pain, ROM and function on CMLBP.