Short-term effects of the suboccipital muscle inhibition technique and cranio-cervical flexion exercise on hamstring flexibility, cranio-vertebral angle, and range of motion of the cervical spine in subjects with neck pain: A randomized controlled trial
Affiliations: [a] Department of Physical Therapy, College of Health Sciences, Korea University, Seoul 02841, Korea | [b] Scientific Instruments Reliability Assessment Center, Korea Basic Science Institute, Daejeon 34133, Korea | [c] Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, College of Medicine, Korea University, Seoul 02841, Korea
Correspondence:
[*]
Corresponding author: Hyeong-Dong Kim, Department of Physical Therapy, College of Health Science, Korea University, Anam-ro, Seongbuk-Gu, Seoul 136-701, Korea. Tel.: +82 2 940 2835; Fax: +82 2 940 2830; E-mail: hdkimx1234@daum.net.
Abstract: BACKGROUND: Cervical spinal instability often leads to neck pain and forward head posture (FHP). To improve neck pain and FHP, both the suboccipital muscle inhibition (SMI) technique and cranio-cervical flexion exercise (CCFE) have been used. However, little is known regarding the validity of hamstring flexibility in neck pain subjects after CCFE as a treatment index, and comparison between the SMI technique and CCFE for neck pain treatment. OBJECTIVE:This study aimed to determine the short-term effects of SMI technique and CCFE, which represent passive and active exercise programs, respectively, and whether these improve the straight leg raise (SLR) test results, popliteal angle (PA), cranio-vertebral angle (CVA), and cervical range of motion (CROM) and are equally effective in immediate enhancement of such measures in neck pain subjects. METHODS:Twenty subjects with neck pain were randomly allocated to the SMI and CCFE groups (n= 10 each). The outcomes were evaluated via clinical evaluation and SLR, PA, CVA, and CROM measurement before and after intervention. RESULTS: SLR test results, PA, CVA (sitting and standing), and CROM (flexion, extension, lateral flexion, and right and left rotations) after both interventions were significantly higher than those before the interventions (P< 0.05). The SLR test results (left), PA, and CVA (standing) after the SMI technique improved to levels similar to those observed after CCFE. CONCLUSIONS: Both the SMI technique and CCFE improve SLR test results, PA, CVA, and CROM and are equally effective in immediate enhancement of the hamstring flexibility, CVA, and CROM in subjects with neck pain.
Keywords: Cervical range of motion, cranio-cervical flexion exercise, cranio-vertebral angle, hamstring flexibility, suboccipital muscle inhibition technique
