EFFECT OF MULLIGAN MEDIAL/LATERAL GLIDE WITH AND WITHOUT COMPRESSION/DECOMPRESSION TECHNIQUE ON PAIN, RANGE OF MOTION, AND FUNCTION ON PATIENTS WITH KNEE OSTEOARTHRITIS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Knee osteoarthritis (OA) is a degenerative joint disorder characterized by cartilage degradation, joint stiffness, and functional impairment, significantly impacting quality of life. Manual therapy, particularly Mulligan Mobilization with Movement (MWM), is widely used to reduce pain and restore function. However, the additional value of integrating compression and decompression techniques into medial/lateral glides remains underexplored in clinical practice. Objective: To compare the effectiveness of Mulligan’s medial/lateral glide with and without compression-decompression on pain, range of motion (ROM), and functional ability in individuals with knee osteoarthritis. Methods: A double-blinded randomized controlled trial was conducted over six months involving 54 patients aged 30–60 years with unilateral Grade II knee OA. Participants were randomly allocated into two groups (n=27 each): Group A received MWM with compression-decompression, and Group B received MWM alone. Each participant underwent 12 intervention sessions over four weeks. Pain was assessed using the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS), ROM using goniometry, and function using the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC). Pre- and post-intervention outcomes were compared using the Wilcoxon Signed-Rank and Mann-Whitney U tests. Results: Significant improvements were observed in both groups across all outcome measures. The experimental group showed a greater reduction in pain (NRS: 2.79±0.85 to 1.83±0.69; p<0.001), enhanced ROM (Flexion: 4.02±1.36 to 1.00±0.00; p<0.001), and improved function (WOMAC: 2.65±0.55 to 2.36±0.48; p<0.001). However, between-group analysis revealed no statistically significant superiority of one intervention over the other (p>0.05), though responder analysis indicated better clinical improvement in the compression-decompression group. Conclusion: The addition of compression and decompression techniques to Mulligan MWM may offer enhanced clinical benefits in pain relief, ROM, and function for patients with knee OA, supporting its use in routine rehabilitation settings.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".