Author | Sample size (n) | Population | Purpose | Protocol Duration | Anatomical administration of MET | Outcome | Pre-VAS | Post-VAS | Pre- ROM | Post-ROM | Other |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Ballantyne et al. [22] | 40 | Asymptomatic participants | Flexibility increase | 1 session | Hamstring | Increased ROM | n/a | n/a | 167.3° | 170.0° | n/a |
Bindra [10] | 30 | Patients with chronic LBP | Effect of technique | 6 sessions | Sacroiliac joint | Decreased Pain | 6.5 | 1.6 | n/a | n/a | Oswestry disability index |
Burns et al. [33] | 18 | Asymptomatic participants | Flexibility increase | 1 session | Cervical spine | Increased ROM | n/a | n/a | 71.5° | + 3.9° | n/a |
Cassidy et al. [14] | 100 | Mechanical neck pain patients | Effect of technique | 1 session | Upper trapezius | Pain decreased more than ROM improved | n/a | n/a | n/a | n/a | NRS-101 pain score (pre 37.7 vs post 20.4) |
Fryer et al. [15] | 52 | Asymptomatic participants | Flexibility increase | 1 session | Atlanto-axial joint | Increased ROM | n/a | n/a | 52.41° | 59.06° | n/a |
Fryer et al. [34] | 12 | Asymptomatic participants | Neurophysiological responses | 1 session | L5/S1 segment bilaterally | Decreased motor excitability (increased silent period and decreased H reflex) | n/a | n/a | n/a | n/a | n/a |
Hamilton et al. [16] | 90 | Asymptomatic participants | Effect of technique | 1 session | Sub-occipital region | No difference in pressure pain thresholds | n/a | n/a | n/a | n/a | n/a |
Kamali et al. [35] | 46 | Women with thoracic Kyphosis | Effect of technique | 15 sessions | Thoracic spine | Reduced Kyphosis and increased Strength | n/a | n/a | n/a | n/a | Sitting kyphosis angle pre 45.7° Sitting kyphosis angle post 40.6° |
Küçükşen et al. [17] | 82 | Patients with chronic lateral epicondylitis | Effect of technique | 8 sessions | Elbow | Improvement on strength, pain and function | 7.39 | 3.28 | n/a | n/a | DASH score pre 46.7 post 22.7 |
Laudner et al. [36] | 39 | Asymptomatic participants | Effect of technique | 12 sessions | Pectoralis minor | Increased muscle length, Decreased forward scapular position | n/a | n/a | n/a | n/a | Pectorali s length pre 8.0 post 8.8, Scapular position pre 13.6 post 12.1 |
Lenehan et al. [21] | 59 | Asymptomatic participants | Increase trunk ROM | 1 session | Thoracic spine | Increased ROM | n/a | n/a | 26.4° | 36.7° | n/a |
Moore et al. [37] | 61 | Asymptomatic Athletes | Flexibility increase | 1 session | Glenohumeral joint | Increased Joint mobility | n/a | n/a | −13.5 | −8.5 | n/a |
Nagrale et al. [38] | 60 | Patients with non-specific neck pain | Effect of technique | 12 sessions | Upper trapezius | Pain and Disability reduction | 8.2 | 6.1 | n/a | n/a | Neck disability index pre: 42.9 and post: 31.9 |
Oliveira-Campelo et al. [39] | 117 | Patients with unilateral latent trigger points | Effect of technique | 1 session | Upper trapezius | Improves cervical motion and pain pressure sensitivity | n/a | n/a | 57.4 | 58.7 | n/a |
Phadke et al. [13] | 60 | Neck pain population | Effect of technique | 6 days | Upper trapezius and levator scapulae | Decreased VAS | 5.5 | 1.64 | n/a | n/a | n/a |
Sadria et al. [12] | 64 | Patients with latent trigger points | Effect of technique | 1 session | Upper trapezius | Decreased VAS and increased ROM | 7.61 | 6.65 | 5.68 cm | 6.56 cm | n/a |
Sakshi et al. [40] | 30 | Patients with chronic neck pain | Effect of technique | 8 sessions | Suboccipitalis, upper trapezius, and pectoralis major | Reduced Pain | 6.4 | 1.6 | n/a | n/a | Disability index pre 34.9 post 11.9 |
Schenk et al. [41] | 18 | Asymptomatic participants | Effect of technique | 7 sessions | Cervical region | Increased ROM | n/a | n/a | Flexion: 51.8° Extention: 69.1° L Rotation: 35.6° R Rotation: 35.2° | Flexion: 54.4° Extention: 71.9° L Rotation: 40.8° R rotation: 43.4° | n/a |
Schenk et al. [18] | 26 | Asymptomatic patients | Flexibility increase | 8 sessions | Lumbar region | Increased ROM | n/a | n/a | 13.8° | 36.7° | n/a |
Selkow et al. [7] | 20 | Patients with non-specific LBP | Effect of technique | 1 session | Lumbar region | Decreased pain | 2.9 | 2.5 | n/a | n/a | n/a |
Shadmehr et al. [20] | 30 | Female with Knee Rom impairment | Effect of technique | 10 sessions | Hamstrings | Increased ROM | n/a | n/a | 145.1° | 167.2° | n/a |
Smith et al. [19] | 40 | Asymptomatic participants | Flexibility increase | 2 sessions | Hamstrings | Increased ROM | n/a | n/a | 145.5° | 154.0° | n/a |
Tanwar et al. [42] | 30 | Patients with plantar fasciitis | Effect of technique | 18 sessions | Gastrocnemius | Increased ROM and reduced pain | 6.46 | 2.2 | 6.73 | 14.53 | n/a |
Ulger et al. [9] | 113 | Patients with chronic low back pain | Effect of manual therapy | 18 sessions | Low back | Pain reduction and increase of functional parameters | 6.9 | 2.08 | n/a | n/a | n/a |
Wilson et al. [8] | 8 | Patients with acute low back pain | Effect of technique | 8 sessions | Low back | Change in ODI score (functional improvement) | n/a | n/a | n/a | n/a | Oswestry Disability Index pre 45 post 7 |
Yeganeh Lari et al. [11] | 60 | Female with latent trigger points | Effect of technique | 4 sessions | Upper trapezius | Decreased VAS and increased ROM | 6.8 | 4.6 | 23.8° | 31.1° | n/a |