This randomized controlled trial aims to compare the effectiveness of Autogenic Inhibition and Reciprocal Inhibition in treating shin splints among amateur footballers aged 18-30 from SA Gardens Football Club, Lahore. Participants will be recruited through non-probability convenient sampling and randomly assigned into two groups using random number sampling. A single-blind approach will be employed, with one group receiving Autogenic Inhibition treatment and the other receiving Reciprocal Inhibition treatment over a period of four weeks, with three sessions per week. The study will measure outcomes including pain alleviation, improvement in range of motion (ROM), enhanced function, and improved sports performance. This research seeks to provide insights into the benefits of muscle energy techniques for athletes with shin splints, contributing valuable knowledge to sports medicine and rehabilitation practices.
Recent literature provides substantial evidence supporting the efficacy of muscle energy techniques (METs), including Autogenic Inhibition, for various musculoskeletal conditions across different populations. Robert F. et al. (2023) conducted a quasi-experimental study using a pre- and post-test design to compare Kalternborn grade III mobilization and METs in 30 patients, finding significant improvements in pain and neck function. Siddiqui M. et al. (2022) demonstrated in a randomized control trial that Autogenic Inhibition was more effective than Reciprocal Inhibition in improving pain, range of motion, and functional disability in patients with mechanical neck pain. Similarly, Osama M. et al. (2022) found Autogenic Inhibition to be the most effective among static stretching, AI-MET, and RI-MET for enhancing isometric muscle strength in neck pain patients. Majeed A. et al. (2021) showed that Autogenic Inhibition had better outcomes than static stretching for hamstring flexibility. Khaled H. Yousef et al. revealed that adding METs to conventional therapy significantly improved pain, impairment, and hip range of motion in patients with chronic discogenic sciatica. A systemic review by Thomas E. et al. (2019) confirmed METs' effectiveness in reducing chronic and acute pain and improving range of motion. Despite these positive findings, there is limited research on METs for sports-related conditions like shin splints. This study aims to fill this gap by examining the specific benefits and drawbacks of a structured MET program for shin splints in a sports environment, providing valuable insights for athletes in managing and preventing overuse and bone stress injuries efficiently.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
DOUBLE
Enrollment
16
Heating Therapy will be performed on subjects along with PNF Exercises.
Manual Soft tissue Release will be performed on subjects along with PNF Exercises.
Pakistan Sports Board
Lahore, Punjab Province, Pakistan
RECRUITINGPain: Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS)
NPRS is a reliable tool when measuring pain.
Time frame: 1st day and 12th week.
Ranges of Motion: Goniometery
The testing position will supine laying with foot in a resting position and towel rolled under ankle, the goniometer center will be on either of the malleolus. The proximal arm will be placed parallel to the ground or tibia/fibula. The distal arm will be moved with the movement of foot into dorsiflexion or plantarflexion.
Time frame: 1st day and 12th week.
Function: Lower Extremity Functioning Scale (LEFS)
LFS is reliable tool to measure lower extremity functional status. It will take 2-5 minutes with each subject to take th readings.
Time frame: 1st day and 12th week.
Performance: 60m yard test
1.60m yard test Athlete to sprint as fast as possible over 60 metres after warming up for 10 minutes. The assistant marks out a 60-metre straight section on the track with cones. The assistant gives the command "GO" and starts the stopwatch. The athlete sprints as fast as possible over the 60 metres. The assistant stops the stopwatch as the athlete's torso crosses the finishing line and records the time.
Time frame: 1st day and 12th week.
Performance: Yoyo Test
Yoyo test: Subject performs an appropriate warm-up. Use cones to mark out two lines 20 meters apart as per the diagram. The participants start with their foot behind one of the lines, and begin running when instructed. They continue running between the two lines, turning when signaled by the recorded beeps. After each minute or so, the pace gets quicker. If the line is not reached in time the subject must run to the line, turn and try to catch up with the pace within 2 more 'beeps. The test is stopped if the subject fails to catch up with the pace within the two ends.
Time frame: 1st day and 12th week.
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.