An interventional study of Sciatic nerve flossing technique and Active Release Technique in Cyclists and Sciatica, sponsored by Riphah International University. Active, not recruiting at 1 site in Pakistan. Open to male participants aged 18 Years to 30 Years, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2025-02-14.
Sponsored by Riphah International University · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment
Thus the aim of my study is to determine the comparative effects of sciatic nerve flossing and active release technique on pain, flexibility, and functionality in lower limbs of cyclists with sciatica.
This study investigates the comparative effects of Sciatic Nerve Flossing and Active Release Technique on pain, flexibility, and functionality in cyclists with sciatica. To compare the efficacy of Sciatic Nerve Flossing and Active Release Technique in reducing pain and improving functional performance in cyclists diagnosed with sciatica over a six-week period. A randomized clinical trial was conducted with 32 participants, aged 18 to 35, diagnosed with sciatica persisting for more than six weeks. Participants were randomly assigned to two groups: Group A received Sciatic Nerve Flossing, while Group B underwent Active Release Technique. Pain levels were measured using the Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS), functional performance was assessed using the Lower Extremity Functional Score (LEFS), and flexibility was evaluated via the Sit and Reach Test.
149 studies on the registry are indexed under Sciatica; 31 are open to participants now.
This study's enrollment of 32 is below the median of 68 across 122 interventional studies indexed under Sciatica.
Browse Sciatica studies →Riphah International University is the lead sponsor of 2,193 studies on the registry; 650 are open to participants now.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.
Exclusion Criteria:
Underlined terms in the criteria open these too. Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.
A reason a treatment, test or procedure should not be given to a particular person, such as an allergy, another illness or a medicine they take.
Contraindication
A reason a treatment, test or procedure should not be given to a particular person, such as an allergy, another illness or a medicine they take.
Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.
Group A 16 subjects were treated with Sciatic Nerve Flossing Technique.
Other: Sciatic nerve flossing technique
Group B 16 subjects were treated with Active Release Technique
Other: Active Release Technique
Group A 16 subjects were treated with Sciatic Nerve Flossing Technique. Subjects were in sitting position. Nerve Flossing Technique was performed actively with the participant sitting on a chair. The participant was flex the knee of the target lower extremity backwards beside the chair, as far back as possible and flex the neck at the same time, holding both the flexed knee and neck in this position for 10 seconds. The participant in turn will extend the neck and the knee of the target lower extremity, abduct and then flex the hip until pain is felt and do not push beyond that point. This extended position was maintained for 10 seconds. The above procedure of Nerve Flossing Technique was repeated for 15 times, 3 sets with an interval of 5 minutes between each set. As the nerve becomes less sensitive, the participant can increase the stretching effect by dorsiflexion the ankle and extending the toes of the foot upward towards the shin.
Group B 16 subjects were treated with Active Release Technique. Subjects were in prone position. ART was performed actively by the participant lying on a bed. The participant was dorsiflex the foot of the target lower extremity, holding the dorsiflexion foot in this position for 10 seconds. The participant in turn was plantar-flexed the foot of the target lower extremity. This dorsiflexion position was maintained for 10 seconds. The above procedure of Active Release Technique was repeated for 15 times, 3 sets with an interval of 5 minutes between each set. As the muscles becomes more flexible, the participant can increase the flexibility effect by plantar flexing the foot.
NPRS
The Numeric Aggravation Rating Scale (NPRS) is normally used to survey torment. Change in the NPRS across time can be deciphered with responsiveness lists. Patient level of pain will be assessed using this scale. This scale ranges from 0 to 10. 0 indicates "no pain" and 10 indicates "worst pain(48). High test-retest reliability is indicated by an ICC \> 0.70; Cronbach's alpha \> 0.70 suggests great internal consistency. The construct validity of the NPRS examines how well the scores correspond to theoretical pain components, while the criterion validity compares results to established pain measures.(49).
Time frame: 6 Weeks
Sit and Reach Test
Sit-and-arrive at tests are generally utilized as estimation apparatuses for assessing hamstring and lower back adaptability. The old style sits and arrive at test (SRT), initially planned by Wells and Dillon (1952) is frequently included as a feature of game related actual wellness test batteries (American Union for Wellbeing Actual Instruction Entertainment and Dance (AAHPERD), 1986, Gathering of Europe Council for the Improvement of Game, 1993) to assess hamstring muscle adaptability. The SRT and TT test have a similar testing strategy (maximal trunk flexion with knee straight and lower leg in 90° of dorsiflexion) with the main contrast being the trying position, sitting and standing, separately(50).
Time frame: 6 weeks
Lower Extremity Funtional Score
The reasonable structure that directed the improvement of the LEFS incorporated that the scale be founded on the World Wellbeing Association's model of incapacity and impairment, be effective to manage, score, and record in the clinical record as for patient and clinician time, be pertinent to a wide assortment of patients with lower-limit muscular circumstances, incorporating patients with a scope of handicap levels, conditions, illnesses, medicines, and ages, be material for reporting capability on a singular patient premise as well as in gatherings, for example, for clinical results evaluation and clinical examination designs, be created utilizing an efficient course of thing determination and thing scaling, yield solid estimations (have inner consistency and test-retest dependability), and yield substantial estimations (at a solitary moment and delicate to legitimate change)(51)(52). While ICC \> 0.70 indicates good reliability for LEFS, Cronbach's alpha \> 0.70 ensures internal con
Time frame: 6 weeks
Plan to share: No
This study is active, not recruiting, as verified in Feb 2025. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.
Riphah International University →