Muscle energy technique (MET) is a form of manual therapy frequently used to correct lumbopelvic pain (LPP), herein the patient voluntarily contracts specific muscles against the resistance of the clinician. Studies on MET regarding magnitude and duration of effectiveness are limited. This study was a randomized controlled trial in which 20 subjects with self-reported LPP were randomized into two groups (MET or control) after magnitude of pain was determined. MET of the hamstrings and iliopsoas consisted of four 5-second hold/relax periods, while the control group received a sham treatment. Tests for current and worst pain, and pain with provocation were administered at baseline, immediately following intervention and 24 hours after intervention. Separate 2x3 ANOVAs were used to assess results as change scores. Visual analog score (VAS) for worst pain reported in the past 24 hours decreased for the MET group (4.3mm+/-19.9, p=.03) and increased for the sham (control) group (17.1mm+/-21.2, p=.03). Subjects receiving MET demonstrated a decrease in VAS worst pain over the past 24 hours, thereby suggesting that MET may be useful to decrease LPP over 24 hours.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 January 2025.
All research outputs
#23,460,772
of 34,559,526 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Manual & Manipulative Therapy (Journal of Manual & Manipulative Therapy)
#500
of 699 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#162,722
of 241,698 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Manual & Manipulative Therapy (Journal of Manual & Manipulative Therapy)
#99
of 135 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,559,526 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 699 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.4. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 241,698 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 135 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
