Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Completed

NCT Number: NCT07165249

PRT vs MET in Non-Specific Low Back Pain With Facet Restriction

Objective:The study aimed to compare the effectiveness of Positional Release Technique (PRT) and Muscle Energy Technique (MET) in reducing pain and improving outcomes for patients suffering from non-specific low back pain (NSLBP).

Materials and Methods: Thirty-six patients between the ages of 25 and 50, all referred by an orthopedic surgeon for treatment of non-specific low back pain (NSLBP), were enrolled in the study. Participants were randomly allocated into two groups (n=18 per group) using a computer-generated randomization sequence. However, details regarding allocation concealment and blinding of participants or assessors were not specified, which may influence the risk of bias. Group A received Positional Release Technique (PRT), while Group B received Muscle Energy Technique (MET). Prior to each treatment session, both groups received a standardized 15-minute hot pack application as a co-intervention to promote muscle relaxation and ensure consistency across interventions. Pain intensity was assessed using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), and functional outcomes were measured with the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMQ). Participants in both groups attended three physiotherapy sessions per week over a four-week treatment period.

Completed

Looking for future studies?

Notify Me

Key information

Conditions

Non Specific Low Back Pain Muscle Energy Technique

Age range

25 year–50 year

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Not applicable

Primary location

Palestine Ahliya University

Bethlehem, 3600700, Palestinian Territories

About this study

  • Study Identification

Official Title:

Positional Release Technique Versus Muscle Energy Technique for Patients with Non-Specific Low Back Pain With Facet Joint Restriction

Brief Title:

PRT vs MET in Non-Specific Low Back Pain

Study Type:

Interventional (Clinical Trial)

Phase:

Not Applicable

  • Study Description

Brief Summary:

This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of Positional Release Technique (PRT) and Muscle Energy Technique (MET) in reducing pain and improving outcomes for patients suffering from non-specific low back pain with suspected facet joint dysfunction. Thirty-six patients were randomized into two groups and received treatment for 4 weeks, 3 sessions per week. Pain intensity (VAS) and functional disability (Roland-Morris Questionnaire) were assessed pre- and post-intervention.

  • Study Design

Allocation: Randomized

Intervention Model: Parallel Assignment

Masking: None (Open Label)

Primary Purpose: Treatment

  • Conditions & Interventions

Condition:

Non-Specific Low Back Pain (NSLBP)

Interventions:

Group A (PRT): Positional Release Technique - 3 sessions/week for 4 weeks with hot pack co-intervention.

Group B (MET): Muscle Energy Technique - 3 sessions/week for 4 weeks with hot pack co-intervention.

  • Outcome Measures

Primary Outcome Measures:

Pain intensity (VAS) - Baseline and after 4 weeks.

Functional disability (Roland-Morris Questionnaire, RMQ) - Baseline and after 4 weeks.

  • Eligibility

Ages Eligible for Study: 25-50 years

Sexes Eligible for Study: All

Inclusion criteria

Chronic NSLBP >3 months, suspected facet joint dysfunction.

Exclusion criteria

History of spinal surgery, vertebral fracture, osteoporosis, inflammatory/metabolic bone disease, spondylolisthesis.

  • Enrollment

Enrollment: 36 participants (actual)

  • Locations

Maqassed Hospital, East Jerusalem, Palestine

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: No

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

Inclusion criteria

  • Participants in the age category of 25 to 50 years old.
  • both male and female, with a diagnosis of low back pain (LBP), with or without referred leg pain.
  • chronic LBP lasting more than three months.

Exclusion criteria

  • Osteoporosis.
  • bone disease.
  • Spondylolisthesis.
  • History of vertebral fracture.
  • History of spinal surgery.

Treatment and study plan

Positional release technique (PRT)

Behavioral

Group A (PRT): Patients lay prone for the application of the hot pack. PRT was then applied to the erector spinae muscles. The therapist identified tender points and passively positioned the patient into a position of comfort, typically involving lateral trunk flexion toward the symptomatic side. Each session involved three 90-second holds per tender point. PRT procedures followed standardized positioning principles as described in previous literature.

Muscle energy technique

Behavioral

Group B (MET): Following the hot pack application, patients were assessed for segmental dysfunction via palpation of lumbar transverse processes in prone position. MET was applied using isometric contractions aimed at correcting lumbar rotational or side-bending dysfunctions. Each contraction was held for 7-10 seconds, followed by a passive stretch. The technique was repeated for 3-5 cycles per session.

Primary outcomes

  1. VAS - Baseline and after 4 weeks. Functional disability (Roland-Morris Questionnaire, RMQ) - Baseline and after 4 weeks.

    Time frame: 4 weeks

    A popular instrument for measuring pain is the visual analogue scale (VAS). Typically, it's a 10-cm line with the words "worst pain imaginable" at one end and "no pain" at the other. In order to quantify their level of pain, patients mark the line, and the distance from "no pain" serves as a proxy for pain

  2. RMQ

    Time frame: 4 weeks

    It asks about 24 different activities and functions that could be impacted by back pain. Patients indicate if they now find it difficult to be active owing to back discomfort by answering "yes" or "no" to each topic. The total number of "yes" responses is added up to determine the score; a higher score denotes a larger disability

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

Palestine Ahliya University

Other

Registry information

Official study title

Positional Release Technique Versus Muscle Energy Technique For Patients With Non-Specific Low Back Pain With Facet Joint Restriction

Acronym: LBP

Important dates

Study start
2023
Primary completion
2024
Study completion
2024
First posted
Sep 10, 2025
Registry last updated
Sep 10, 2025

OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.

View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)

This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.

Related clinical trials

Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.