Muscle Energy Technique Versus Myofascial Release in Chronic Non Specific Neck Pain
CompletedNot applicableNCT07710950
View the official record on ClinicalTrials.gov Recruiting status changes often. Contact the study team listed on ClinicalTrials.gov, and talk to your doctor before joining a study.
This study has no listed site in Canada in this snapshot. It is included as part of the worldwide chronic pain corpus.
Brief summary (from the registry)
Chronic non-specific neck pain is a common musculoskeletal condition that can significantly affect daily activities, sleep quality, and overall quality of life. It is often associated with muscle tightness, poor posture, and reduced neck mobility without any specific underlying structural pathology such as fracture or nerve compression. This study aims to compare two commonly used physiotherapy treatment techniques: Muscle Energy Technique (MET) and Myofascial Release Therapy (MFR) in individuals with chronic non-specific neck pain. A total of 52 participants aged 18-45 years with neck pain lasting more than three months will be included in this randomized controlled trial. Participants will be randomly assigned to one of two groups: Group A: Conventional physiotherapy plus Muscle Energy Technique Group B: Conventional physiotherapy plus Myofascial Release Therapy Both groups will receive treatment twice weekly for four weeks . Conventional physiotherapy will include moist heat application and stretching exercises for neck muscles. In addition, one group will receive Muscle Energy Technique targeting the upper trapezius, levator scapulae, and scalene muscles, while the other group will receive Myofascial Release Therapy targeting the same muscle groups. Outcome measures will be assessed at baseline, at the second week, and at the fourth week. The study will evaluate: Pain intensity (Numeric Pain Rating Scale) Neck range of motion (Inclinometer) Sleep quality (Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index) Neck-related disability (Neck Disability Index) The results of this study may help determine which technique is more effective in reducing pain, improving movement, enhancing sleep quality, and reducing disability in individuals with chronic non-specific neck pain. This may support clinicians in selecting the most appropriate treatment approach.
Study details
- Official title
- Muscle Energy Technique Versus Myofascial Release in Chronic Non-Specific Neck Pain
- Conditions
- Chronic Neck Pain
- Mechanical Neck Pain
- Interventions
- Procedure: Muscle Energy Technique
- Procedure: Myofascial Release Therapy
- Sponsor
- University of Lahore
- Start date
- 2025-08-01
- Primary completion
- 2025-12-31
- Sex
- All
- Age range
- from 18 Years to 45 Years
- Healthy volunteers
- true
- Results posted
- No results posted in this snapshot
- Countries
- Pakistan
- Total sites listed
- 1
Eligibility criteria
Show eligibility criteria (verbatim from the registry)
Inclusion Criteria: * Both gender * Participant with neck pain from the past 3 months. * Participant with neck pain ≥7 on Visual analogue scale. * Participant with unilateral tightness of upper trapezius, scalene and levator scapulae on manual palpation. * Diagnosis consistent with Non-Specific Neck Pain (NSNP): mechanical pain aggravated by posture or movement, no neurological signs, no red flags, and pain localized to the neck with referral not extending below the shoulder. * Positive Craniocervical Flexion Test (CCFT) indicating deep cervical flexor dysfunction. Exclusion Criteria: * Participant who received any therapeutic intervention for neck pain. * Participate with any inflammatory, neurological or malignant condition like rheumatoid arthritis, cervical radiculopathy or tumor of the neck respectively. * Participant with associated neck pain with facial pain or headache as a result of any fracture or major trauma to the cervical spine. * Participant with the history of surgery of cervical spine in the last 12 months. * Participant with disc prolapse or stenosis. * Participant with any deformity such as torticollis, sprengel's deformity or scoliosis.
Source: ClinicalTrials.gov (US National Library of Medicine), snapshot October 2026. Check the registry for current recruiting status. Record: https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT07710950