The effect of physiotherapy and McKenzie exercises for patients with lumbar disc herniation.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Relevance of the topic. 90% of people of working age facing with lumbar disc herniation which is localized in L4-L5, L5-S1 segments and causes of back pain which is usually spread to one or both legs. Effective treatment for these lesions – McKenzie exercises. It aims to stretch the spine and relieve the pain. The object of the final work – the effect of physiotherapy and McKenzie exercises for patients with lumbar disc herniation. The objective of work – to determine the effect of physiotherapy and McKenzie exercises for patients with lumbar disc herniation. In the first part of the final work analyzing the lumbar spine anatomical and biomechanical peculiarities, hernia and the reasons for its formation, diagnosis, treatment, also presents McKenzie method. In the second part discusses the metthods and their applications in physiotherapy. In the third part presents and analyzes obtained research results. The characteristic of work: the research work was carried out in the health center „Energetikas“ in 2016 from March until May. The study involved 10 patients (6 female and 4 male) who were selected using target selection and divided into 2 groups of 5 people. Group I – control group, group II – research. Was subject to the following research methods: VAS pain scale; Trunk muscle endurance by McGill; Modified Shober test; Lovett test; the Oswestry disability questionnaire; the Roland – Morris disability questionnaire. According to these results it can be concluded, taht the usual physiotherapy and McKenzie exercises reduced back pain, increased trunk muscle endurance, the lumbar spine flexibility and muscle stenght in the lower extremity, also improved the functional status. The practical significance of the results and application possibilities describes the fact that the data obtained during the research can be used for rehabilitation centres, in order to increase the impact of physical therapy.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".