TY  - BOOK
AU  - Esraa Mahmoud Mahmoud
AU  - Eman Ibrahim Elhadidy , 
AU  - Heba Gaber Abdelaziz , 
AU  - Mohamed Mohamed Safaa Eldeen , 
TI  - Low level laser therapy versus iontophoresis post supracondylar humerus fracture in children / 
PY  - 2021///
CY  - Cairo : 
PB  - Esraa Mahmoud Mahmoud , 
KW  - Iontophoresis
KW  - Post-operative
KW  - Supracondylar humeral fracture
N1  - Thesis (M.Sc.) - Cairo University - Faculty of Physical Therapy - Department of Growth and Development Disorders in Pediatrics; Issued also as CD
N2  - Background and Purpose: Supracondylar humerus fractures are the most frequent fractures in children, closed reduction and percutaneous pinning is the gold standard surgical treatment. Low level laser therapy (LLLT) and iontophoresis are noninvasive and cost-effective approach in the field of physiotherapy. The purpose: to compare between the post-operative effects of LLLT and Iontophoresis on range of motion (ROM) and pain level of elbow joint in children with supracondylar humerus fracture. Subjects and Methods: Sixty six children from both sexes with supracondylar humerus fracture underwent surgical intervention, their ages ranged from 4 to 10 years. They were recruited from Fayoum University Hospitals after two weeks from removing the pins and the cast. They were randomly assigned into three groups in equal numbers (A, B, C). Control group (A) received traditional exercises program only, study group (B) received iontophoresis and traditional exercises program as group (A) and study group (C) received LLLT and traditional exercises program as group (A), for 3 sessions per week for 4 weeks.The ROM (flexion and extension) and pain level (pain intensity and pressure pain threshold PPT) of affected elbow were measured at the beginning of the study and after 4 weeks of suggested treatment programs. Results: There was no significant difference between three groups (control and two study groups) pre-treatment (p > 0.05). Comparison between groups post treatment revealed a significant increase in elbow ROM and PPT of group B and C compared with that of control group A (p < 0.01)
UR  - http://172.23.153.220/th.pdf
ER  -