ArticleInternational journal of therapeutic massage & bodywork2024
A Comparison Between the Effectiveness of Tepurak Therapy Versus Deep Tissue Massage Stretching on Low Back Function in Nonspecific Low Back Pain.
Article in International journal of therapeutic massage & bodywork, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The research carried out is a large research project that examined two different massage methods on many variables so that they can determine their effect on variables on a wider scale, namely pain, range of movement (ROM), and low back function. Pain and ROM variables have been published in different journals, and their acute effects are only known after treatment and the results are effective. This study examined the low back function variable 24, 48, and 72 hours after treatment. Objective: This study aimed to determine the effectiveness of Tepurak and deep tissue massaging with stretching (DTMS) on low back function in nonspecific low back pain (NSLBP) and conduct a comparison of the effectiveness of Tepurak versus DTMS for low back function in NSLBP. Methods: This research is a quasi-experiment using a pre-test/post-test design to determine the difference in scores before and after treatment. The variable measured involved the low back function using the Oswestry Disability Index. Measurements were carried out four times at pre-test, 24, 48, and 72 hours after the treatments. This study used two different sample groups. The research sample consisted of 42 NSLBP sufferers who were randomly divided into two groups, A and B. Group A received Tepurak treatment, while Group B received DTMS treatment. These treatments were carried out in one treatment session. Results: The results of the different treatments for the low back function variables in the Tepurak treatment have a p-value of 0.000. The results of the low back function variables in the DTMS treatment have a p-value of 0.000. The results of the comparison test of Tepurak versus DTMS therapy for the low back function variable had a p-value of 0.771. Conclusion: Both Tepurak and DTMS are effective in improving low back function in NSLBP cases. In comparison between Tepurak and DTMS, there was no significant difference in the effectiveness in improving low back function in NSLBP cases.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.