| J.M. Pratheesh*1, K. Anantharaj1, D. Kannan2, R. Ferdinand3, M.P. Thenmozhi4, S. Kohilavani5, R. Vishnupriya6, S. Sathyapriya7 Authors: 2Principal, JKK Munirajah Medical Research Foundation, College of Physiotherapy, Komarapalayam, The Tamilnadu Dr. M.G.R Medical University, Chennai 1,3,4,5,6,7,8Professors. JKK Munirajah Medical Research Foundation, College of Physiotherapy, Komarapalayam, The Tamilnadu Dr. M.G.R Medical University, Chennai Corresponding Author: *1MPT Student, JKK. Munirajah Medical Research Foundation, College of Physiotherapy, Komarapalayam, The Tamilnadu Dr. M.G.R Medical University, Chennai,E-Mail- jmpratheesh11@gmail.com |
ABSTRACT
| Background: Cervicogenic headache (CGH) is a secondary headache arising from musculoskeletal dysfunction of the cervical spine, commonly involving the sterno-cleidomastoid muscle. These techniques aim to relieve pain, improve mobility, and restore function. Objective of the study was to compare the effect of Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy with Cryotherapy versus Muscle Energy Technique with Cryotherapy for the sterno-cleidomastoid muscle in patients with cervicogenic headache. Methodology: Study Design was quasi-experimental design, involving two groups as Group A and Group B with pre-test and post-test measurements. 30 subjects aged 20-40 years diagnosed with cervicogenic headache related to the SCM muscle were selected. Group A received ESWT along with Cryotherapy, whereas Group B received MET along with Cryotherapy. Outcome Measures: Neck Disability Index and cervical Range of Motion were measured on the first day (Week 1) and last day (Week 4) of the intervention. The pre-test and post-test scores were analyzed and presented in tabular and graphical form. Results: While both groups showed significant improvement in reducing pain and disability, Group A demonstrated greater improvement in cervical ROM and faster pain relief compared to Group B. Group B showed more consistent improvement in functional outcome scores over time. Statistical analysis showed significant differences between both groups (p<0.05). Conclusion: The results indicated that Group A (ESWT with cryotherapy) had better improvement in ROM and faster symptom relief, whereas Group B (MET with cryotherapy) showed better improvement in long-term functional outcomes. The study concludes that both approaches are beneficial, but MET with Cryotherapy is more effective in long- term functional outcomes. Keywords: Cervicogenic headache, Extracorporeal shock wave therapy, Muscle energy technique, Sternocleido mastoid muscle, Cryotherapy, Neck Disability Index, Cervical range of motion |
Leave a Reply