000 03027cam a2200349 a 4500
003 EG-GiCUC
005 20250223032813.0
008 210911s2021 ua dh f m 000 0 eng d
040 _aEG-GiCUC
_beng
_cEG-GiCUC
041 0 _aeng
049 _aDeposite
097 _aPh.D
099 _aCai01.21.02.Ph.D.2021.Mo.I
100 0 _aMostafa Mohamed Saad Shams Eldeen
245 1 0 _aImpact of soft tissue manipulation versus traditional physiotherapy program on diaphragmatic excursion in asthmatic patients /
_cMostafa Mohamed Saad Shams Eldeen ; Supervised Hala Mohamed Ezz Eldeen , Mariam Elsayed Mohamed , Khaled Mahmoud Kamel
246 1 5 _aتاثير المعالجة الرخوية للانسجة مقابل العلاج الطبيعى للصدرعلى ازاحة الحجاب الحاجز فى مرضى حساسية الصدر
260 _aCairo :
_bMostafa Mohamed Saad Shams Eldeen ,
_c2021
300 _a100 P. :
_bcharts , facsimiles ;
_c25cm
502 _aThesis (Ph.D.) - Cairo University - Faculty of Physical Therapy - Department of Physical Therapy for Cardiopulmonary and Geriatrics Disorders
520 _aBackground and purpose: Asthma is an important worldwide health problem. Asthma carries major health risks with the most cause-specific mortalities being those of respiratory and cardiovascular diseases .Asthma may affect the respiratory function of children and adults.The aim of this study was to compare of soft tissue manipulation versus traditional physiotherapy program on diaphragmatic excursion in asthmatic patients. Subjects and methods: {u200E}Forty men and women participated in this study. Their age ranged from 20to 40 years old, suffered from mild asthma (FEV1 {u2265} 80 %). They were assigned into two equal groups:Group (A) consisted of 20 participants received soft tissue manipulation of upper cervical region (C0-1), upper dorsal region (T3-4) and thoracolumbar junction followed by muscle energy technique once weekly for three weeks .Group (B) consisted of 20 participants received traditional physiotherapy program (pursed lip breathing exercise, diaphragmatic breathing exercise) ten repetitions each exercise per session, three times a week for three weeks respectively . Results: There was significant improvement for group (A) and group (B) in FEV1 (4.10%{u2191}, 3.27 %{u2191}), PEF (22.85%{u2191}, 3.2 %{u2191}), diaphragmatic excursion (19.6%{u2191}, 4.5 %{u2191}) and maximum inspiratory pressure (14.58%{u2191}, 6.11 %{u2191}) for all participant in Group A and B respectively, but there was statistical significance in favor of group A
530 _aIssued also as CD
653 4 _aDiaphragmatic Excursion
653 4 _aFEV1
653 4 _aSpinal manipulation
700 0 _aHala Mohamed Ezz Eldeen ,
_eSupervisor
700 0 _aKhaled Mahmoud Kamel ,
_eSupervisor
700 0 _aMariam Elsayed Mohamed ,
_eSupervisor
856 _uhttp://172.23.153.220/th.pdf
905 _aNazla
_eRevisor
905 _aShimaa
_eCataloger
942 _2ddc
_cTH
999 _c82058
_d82058