IMMEDIATE EFFECT OF MYOFASCIAL RELEASE V/S POSITIONAL RELEASE TECHNIQUE ON LEVATOR SCAPULAE TRIGGER POINTS IN YOUNG ADULTS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Context : Myofascial release is the gentle manual application of sustained pressure to release fascial restriction. One of the cervical spine pain healing methods is Trigger point therapy with positional release method. Aim: To compare the efficacy of Immediate Effect of Myofascial Release and Positional Release techniques on levator scapulae trigger points in young adults. Method and material: Study involved 30 subjects that were divided into 2 groups. Group A (n=15) Myofascial Release technique and Group B (n=15)Positional Release technique. Results: The data was analysed using statistical method of paired’t’-test between the pre and post interventional study of pain and range of motion. Result showed statistically significant improvement (p<0.05) and visible difference in the post intervention. Discussion and conclusion: From the present study we conclude that Myofascial release is more efficient in reducing pain whereas Positional Release Technique is more efficient in increasing the cervical ROM , both Active lateral flexion and Cervical rotation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".