000			03519ntm a2200397 4500
005			20260817104814.0
006			a|||||r|||| 00| 0
008			260817s2022 ua ||||f m||| 00| 0 eng d
040			_aEG-CaUEC _beng _cEG-CaUEC _dEG-CaUEC _erda
082	0	4	_221 _a615.82 _bA.Y.S.
100	1		_aAbdelghany, Yasser Ismail Hussein Smail, _eauthor. _9778
245	1	0	_aStrain-counterstrain versus muscle energy technique in sacroiliac joint dysfunction / _cBy Yasser Ismail Hussein Smail Abdelghany ; supervisors Bassem G. Elnahass, Karima Abdelaty Hassan.
246	3	1	_aالتوتر والتوتر المضاد مقابل تقنية الطاقة العضلية على الاختلال الوظيفي لمفصل العجزي الحرقفي.
264		1	_c2022
300			_ax, 88 pages : _billustrations (some color) ; _c24 cm.
336			_2rdacontent _atext _btxt
337			_2rdamedia _aunmediated _bn
338			_2rdacarrier _avolume _bnc
500			_aSupervisors: Bassem G. Elnahass, Karima Abdelaty Hassan.
502			_aThesis (M.Sc.)-Cairo university, Faculty of Physical Therapy, 2022.
504			_aIncludes bibliographical references.
520			_aBackground: The sacroiliac joint (SIJ) has been long considered an important source of low back pain because its prevalence varies from 10% to 30% with axial low back pain. Several manual techniques were used in SIJ dysfunction (SIJD) treatment as manipulation, muscle energy technique (MET), strain-counterstrain (SCS), and mobilization. However, there is little evidence about the efficacy of MET and SCS have been reported. Design: Randomized controlled trial. Setting: Evaluation and treatment were taken at Warraq Central Hospital and El-Sahel Hospital in the Giza governorate, Egypt. Purpose: Examine the effect of (SCS) versus (MET) on pain pressure threshold (PPT), functional disability, and the innominate angle tilt with SIJ dysfunction. Methods: Fifty-six patients with SIJD were recruited and randomly assigned to receive treatment with either SCS or MET. The outcomes were PPT by Pressure algometer and functional disability by Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and the innominate angle tilt by Palpation Meter (PALM). All outcomes were assessed at pre and post intervention and frequency of treatment was 3 sessions/week for 4 weeks. Results: An intra-group analysis revealed a significant improvement in all outcome measures in both groups while in inter-group analysis, there was a significant difference in frontal innominate angle tilt value and functional disability in favor of the MET group. On other hand, there were no significant differences in pain pressure threshold and sagittal innominate angle tilt between both groups. Conclusion: Both techniques SCS and MET were clinically successful in the treatment of SIJ, however, the MET was superior to SCS in the improvement of frontal innominate angle tilt and functional disability.
650		0	_aSacroiliac joint dysfunction. _9779
650		0	_aSacroiliac joint _xDiseases. _9780
650		0	_aMuscle energy technique. _9781
650		0	_aStrain-counterstrain. _9782
650		0	_aLow back pain _xTreatment. _9783
650		0	_aManual therapy. _9271
650		0	_aPhysical therapy. _9666
655			_2local _aAcademic theses _9760
700	1		_aElnahass, Bassem G., _esupervisor. _9784
700	1		_aHassan, Karima Abdelaty, _esupervisor. _9785
710	2		_aCairo University. _bFaculty of Physical Therapy. _9771
942			_2ddc _n0 _cTHESIS
945			_aGIFT _bDONOR2 _c2026-08-17
999			_c193 _d193