Instrument Assisted Soft Tissue Mobilization versus Integrated Neuromuscular Inhibition Technique in Nonspecific Chronic Neck Pain: Single-blinding Randomized Trial.

Objective: This study aimed to compare the effects of instrument-assisted soft tissue mobilization (IASTM) vs integrated neuromuscular inhibition technique (INIT) on pain intensity, pressure pain threshold, neck disability, and electrophysiological properties in nonspecific chronic neck pain.

Methods: We performed a pre-post prospective randomized controlled trial on 90 participants with nonspecific chronic neck pain. The participants were chosen randomly from physical therapy out-patient clinics in the Giza governorate and allocated randomly by permuted block to the following 3 groups: Group A received INIT on the upper trapezius in addition to supervised traditional therapy (STT) as hot pack, stretching and strengthening exercises, Group B received IASTM on the upper trapezius in addition to STT, and Group C received STT only. Treatment was 3 times per week for 4 weeks. Pain intensity by visual analog scale (VAS), pressure pain threshold (PPT) by commander algometer, neck disability by Arabic Neck Disability Index (ANDI), and electrophysiological properties in the form of muscle amplitude by root mean square (RMS), and fatigue by median frequency (MDF) were measured at baseline and after 4 weeks.

Results: In the within-group analysis, there was a statistically significant decrease in VAS, ANDI, and RMS% values within each group with favor to INIT. In PPT and MDF, there was a significant increase within each group with regard to INIT as value <.05. In the between-group analysis at posttreatment, the results reported a statistically significant difference between INIT and STT, and also between IASTM and STT in all variables. Between INIT and IASTM, there was no statistically significant difference in VAS and NDI, but there was a statistically significant difference in PPT, RMS%, and MDF. The post hoc test reported improvement in all variables in all groups, with more favor to the INIT group in PPT and electrophysiological properties only.

Conclusion: In this study, we found no statistically significant differences between INIT and IASTM in VAS and ANDI posttreatment, but there were differences between INIT and STT group and IASTM and STT group.