Clinical trial NCT06309901: Facial Distortion Model and Instrument Assisted Soft Tissue Mobilization Techniques
Official title: Comparison of Facial Distortion Model and Instrument Assisted Soft Tissue Mobilization (IASTM) Techniques After Arthroscopic Meniscus Repair
Study type: OBSERVATIONAL
Overall status: COMPLETED
Conditions: Meniscus Injury
Keywords: IASTM
FDM
Meniscus repair
Lead sponsor: Ankara Yildirim Beyazıt University
Sponsor class: OTHER
First posted: 2024-03-13
Enrollment: 33
Sex: ALL
Minimum age (years): 18
Maximum age (years): 55
Standard ages: ADULT
Accepts healthy volunteers: no
Observational model: OTHER
Time perspective: CROSS_SECTIONAL
Sampling method: PROBABILITY_SAMPLE
Study population: Individuals who were diagnosed after meniscus tear between 18-55 years and suspected magnetic resonance (MRI) or operated during arthroscopy and operated by the surgeon, will be included in the study.

Brief summary: To compare the effects of facial distortion model and equipment assisted soft tissue mobilization techniques on the treatment process, which are among the applications in the rehabilitation process after meniscus repair.

Detailed description: It is possible that pain, ROM, lower extremity flexibility and knee functions will be negatively affected after arthroscopic meniscus repair. This study searches and compares the effectiveness of fascial distortion model (FDM) and IASTM methods for these parameters that can be affected.

Eligibility criteria: Inclusion Criteria:

* The meniscus rupture and suspected magnetic resonance (MR) were diagnosed and operated by the surgeon during arthroscopy.
* Those treated with the same surgical technique
* Can walk independently before the operation
* Can continue treatment for 4 weeks
* Without chondral damage
* Can continue treatment for 4 weeks
* Those who have not had lower extremity surgery before
* No fracture to prevent load transfer in the last 6 months
* There is no full rupture of any ligament in the knee
* Without knee instability
* Those without abnormal changes in Q angle
* According to Cooper classification, meniscus affected area is not in A and F regions.
* Without protruded or extruded herniated disc
* There is no contract in the directory

Exclusion Criteria:

* Can not continue treatment for 4 weeks

Primary outcomes:
measure: Visual Analog Scale
timeFrame: Change from postoperative 4. week at 8. week
measure: environmental measurement
timeFrame: Change from postoperative 4. week at 8. week
measure: Power Track Manuel Muscle Tester
timeFrame: Change from postoperative 4. week at 8. week
measure: sit and reach test
timeFrame: Change from postoperative 4. week at 8. week
measure: Goniometric measurement
timeFrame: Change from postoperative 4. week at 8. week
measure: The Western Ontario Meniscal Evaluation Tool (WOMET )
timeFrame: Change from postoperative 4. week at 8. week
measure: Lysholm Knee Score
timeFrame: Change from postoperative 4. week at 8. week
Secondary outcomes:
Other outcomes:
Locations:
city: Ankara
country: Turkey
facility: Yıldırım Beyazıt University Yenimahalle Training and Research Hospital
Study officials:
affiliation: Ankara Yildirim Beyazıt University
name: Bahar Anaforoğlu, Assoc. Prof.
role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
References:
citation: Cheatham SW, Lee M, Cain M, Baker R. The efficacy of instrument assisted soft tissue mobilization: a systematic review. J Can Chiropr Assoc. 2016 Sep;60(3):200-211.
citation: Kalichman L, Ben David C. Effect of self-myofascial release on myofascial pain, muscle flexibility, and strength: A narrative review. J Bodyw Mov Ther. 2017 Apr;21(2):446-451. doi: 10.1016/j.jbmt.2016.11.006. Epub 2016 Nov 14.
citation: Thalhamer C. A fundamental critique of the fascial distortion model and its application in clinical practice. J Bodyw Mov Ther. 2018 Jan;22(1):112-117. doi: 10.1016/j.jbmt.2017.07.009. Epub 2017 Jul 25.