Maitland Mobilization versus Core Stability Exercises in Management Chronic Nonspecific LBP

Maitland Mobilization versus Core Stability Exercises in Management Chronic Nonspecific LBP

Abstract

Background: Low back pain (LBP) is one of the main causes that affect mechanical function in human bodies worldwide, 90% of the cases with non-specific LBP. Different options are available for the management of non-specific LBP. While Maitland mobilization and core stability exercises are usually utilized in clinical practice for managing Chronic Nonspecific Low Back Pain, there is now a lack of research examining their comparative effectiveness. Objective: The objective of this study is to assess and compare the efficiency of Maitland mobilization and core stability exercise as treatment modalities for adults suffering from chronic non-specific low back pain. Methods:  A total of 36 Non-specific low back pain (NSLBP) patients with ages 18 to 45 years were inducted and given their Informed consent. Subjects were allocated into two groups through simple random sampling. Group A (N=18) received central posterior-anterior vertebral mobilization while group B (N=18) received core stability exercises. Pain and functional disability were assessed using the Visual Analogue scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) respectively. Pre & post-treatment scores were documented and compared to achieve the aim of this study. Results: T-test indicated that the results pre- and post-treatment were showed a statistically positive significant difference by applying Maitland mobilization technique with non-specific LBP to improve functional disability (ODI) and reduce pain intensity (VAS) with (p = 0.001), respectively. On the other hand, results for the application of core stability exercises in management NSLBP also showed positive signs in reducing VAS and improving ODI with (p= 0.001) respectively. The findings suggest that there was no statistically significant difference between the Maitland mobilization technique and core stability exercises in treating NSLBP for pain reduction with (p = 0.312) and improvement in ODI with (p = 0.055). For applying Maitland mobilization in NSLBP, Pearson correlation results indicated that there was no relationship between body mass index (KG/M2) and functional disability (ODI) with (p = 0.034) and pain severity (VAS) with (p = 0.808). For core stability exercises, the results of Pearson’s correlation indicated that there was no relationship between body mass index (KG/M2) and functional disability (ODI) with (p = 0.959) and pain intensity (VAS) with (p = 0.987). By gender, the results showed there were no statistically significant role for Maitland mobilization and core stability exercises in improving function and reducing pain among patients with chronic non-specific low back pain. Conclusion: Both core stability exercises and Maitland method have demonstrated effectiveness in reducing pain and improving functional disability in patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain.

How to cite

Alarab, A., Salhab, I., Darawy, D., Abu-Aker, M., Al-Naji, R., & Hroub, N. (2024). Maitland Mobilization Versus Core Stability Exercises in Management Chronic Nonspecific LBP. Biomedical and Pharmacology Journal17(2), 1115-1124.‏

View at publisher

https://biomedpharmajournal.org/vol17no2/maitland-mobilization-versus-core-stability-exercises-in-management-chronic-nonspecific-lbp/