Effects Of Passive Mobilization Research Articles

The effect of passive mobilization associated with blood flow restriction and combined with electrical stimulation on cardiorespiratory safety, neuromuscular adaptations, physical function, and quality of life in comatose patients in an ICU: a randomized controlled clinical trial

BackgroundIntensive care unit-acquired atrophy and weakness are associated with high mortality, a reduction in physical function, and quality of life. Passive mobilization (PM) and neuromuscular electrical stimulation were applied in comatose patients; however, evidence is inconclusive regarding atrophy and weakness prevention. Blood flow restriction (BFR) associated with PM (BFRp) or with electrical stimulation (BFRpE) was able to reduce atrophy and increase muscle mass in spinal cord-injured patients, respectively. Bulky venous return occurs after releasing BFR, which can cause unknown repercussions on the cardiovascular system. Hence, the aim of this study was to investigate the effect of BFRp and BFRpE on cardiovascular safety and applicability, neuromuscular adaptations, physical function, and quality of life in comatose patients in intensive care units (ICUs).MethodsThirty-nine patients will be assessed at baseline (T0–18 h of coma) and randomly assigned to the PM (control group), BFRp, or BFRpE groups. The training protocol will be applied in both legs alternately, twice a day with a 4-h interval until coma awake, death, or ICU discharge. Cardiovascular safety and applicability will be evaluated at the first training session (T1). At T0 and 12 h after the last session (T2), muscle thickness and quality will be assessed. Global muscle strength and physical function will be assessed 12 h after T2 and ICU and hospital discharge for those who wake up from coma. Six and 12 months after hospital discharge, physical function and quality of life will be re-assessed.DiscussionIn view of applicability, the data will be used to inform the design and sample size of a prospective trial to clarify the effect of BFRpE on preventing muscle atrophy and weakness and to exert the greatest beneficial effects on physical function and quality of life compared to BFRp in comatose patients in the ICU.Trial registrationUniversal Trial Number (UTN) Registry UTN U1111-1241-4344. Retrospectively registered on 2 October 2019. Brazilian Clinical Trials Registry (ReBec) RBR-2qpyxf. Retrospectively registered on 21 January 2020, http://ensaiosclinicos.gov.br/rg/RBR-2qpyxf/

A Systematic Review of Musculoskeletal Mobilization and Manipulation Techniques Used in Veterinary Medicine.

Simple SummaryNeck and back pain are common ailments in animals. While there are medical and surgical treatment options available for select patients, conservative care is the most common form of management of pain, stiffness and muscle spasms. Physical therapists, osteopaths and chiropractors use mobilization and manipulation techniques to evaluate and treat muscle and joint problems in both humans and animals, but there seems to be little scientific evidence available to support their use in veterinary medicine. This study reviews the scientific literature with the goal of identifying the clinical indications, dosages, outcome parameters, and efficacy of mobilization and manipulation techniques in dogs and horses. Fourteen articles were included in this review of which 13 were equine and one was a canine study. There was a large variability in the quality of evidence that supports the use of joint mobilization or manipulation in treating pain, stiffness and muscle hypertonicity in horses. Therefore, it was difficult to draw firm conclusions despite all studies reporting positive effects. Future studies need to establish standardized methods to evaluate the optimal dosages of mobilization and manipulation for use in animals.Mobilization and manipulation techniques are often used in small animal and equine practice; however, questions remain concerning indications, dosing and efficacy. A bibliographic search was performed to identify peer-reviewed publications from 1980 to 2020 that evaluated the clinical effects of musculoskeletal mobilization and manipulation techniques in dogs, cats and horses. The search strategy identified 883 papers for review. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied. The clinical indications, dosages, outcome parameters, and reported efficacy within each publication were recorded and categorized for comparison with scientific quality assessed according to a standardized grading system. Fourteen articles were included in this systematic review of which 13 were equine and one was a canine study. Seven of these were cohort studies and seven were randomized controlled clinical trials. The canine study involved carpal immobilization-remobilization and all equine studies focused on the effects of passive mobilization (n = 5) or manipulation (n = 8) of the axial skeleton. Study quality was low (n = 4), moderate (n = 7), and high (n = 3) and included a wide array of outcome parameters with varying levels of efficacy and duration of therapeutic effects, which prevented further meta-analysis. Therefore, it was difficult to draw firm conclusions despite all studies reporting positive effects. Optimal technique indications and dosages need to be determined to improve the standardization of these treatment options.

Effect of passive mobilization of all foot joints Objectification with a measurement platform

With the help of an electronic walking platform, we tried to verify the effect of passive mobilization of the foot bones with respect to the force, pressures, and surfaces. Two statistically similar groups were tested. A group of 50 persons were mobilized, the other group (25 persons) immobilized. The results indicate that there were no statistically significant differences between the measures taken before and after mobilization concerning the force and surfaces. On the other hand, in the mobilized group there were statistically significant differences that tended to increase. It seems that mobilization stretches the passive and active structures of the foot.