A RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL COMPARING THE EFFICACY OF PROPRIOCEPTIVE NEUROMUSCULAR FACILITATION (PNF) VS. MUSCLE SETTING EXERCISES FOR IMPROVING MOTOR RECOVERY IN POST-STROKE PATIENTS

Background: Stroke is a leading cause of long-term disability worldwide, often resulting in impaired motor function, spasticity, and reduced functional independence. Effective rehabilitation is critical to improving outcomes and restoring quality of life for stroke survivors. Among the various therapeutic approaches, Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation (PNF) and muscle setting exercises are widely practiced, yet their comparative effectiveness remains inadequately explored. This study aimed to evaluate and compare the impact of these two interventions on motor recovery and spasticity reduction in post-stroke patients. Objective: To compare the effects of Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation (PNF) and muscle setting exercises on motor function, spasticity, and functional capacity in post-stroke rehabilitation. Methods: A randomized controlled trial was conducted at City Clinics, Lahore, involving 60 hemiparetic post-stroke patients aged 45–75 years. Participants were randomly assigned into two groups: PNF (n = 30) and muscle setting (n = 30). Each group underwent an intervention protocol of 18 sessions over six weeks, with therapy sessions conducted three times per week. The Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA), Modified Ashworth Scale (MAS), and Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) were used pre- and post-intervention to assess motor function, spasticity, and pain, respectively. Results: The PNF group showed a significant increase in FMA scores from 1.47 ± 0.51 to 3.57 ± 0.50 (p < 0.001), MAS scores rose from 1.00 to 2.90 ± 0.55 (p < 0.001), and NPRS scores decreased from 3.37 ± 0.49 to 1.20 ± 0.89 (p < 0.001). In the muscle setting group, FMA improved from 1.47 ± 0.51 to 1.90 ± 0.80, MAS from 1.47 ± 0.51 to 1.80 ± 0.93, and NPRS from 3.37 ± 0.49 to 2.57 ± 1.25 (all p < 0.05). Conclusion: PNF therapy demonstrated significantly greater improvements in motor function, reduced spasticity, and lower pain levels compared to muscle setting exercises. These findings support PNF as a more comprehensive and effective rehabilitation strategy for post-stroke patients.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Insights-Journal of Health and Rehabilitation
Published
2025-05-25
DOI
https://doi.org/10.71000/pdmbes09
Primary Topic
Stroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

A RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL COMPARING THE EFFICACY OF PROPRIOCEPTIVE NEUROMUSCULAR FACILITATION (PNF) VS. MUSCLE SETTING EXERCISES FOR IMPROVING MOTOR RECOVERY IN POST-STROKE PATIENTS

Ahmed Z. Khan, Muhammad Anas, Iram Saddique, Subhan Ur Rehman Burki et al.
Insights-Journal of Health and Rehabilitation
Stroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
article

A RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL COMPARING THE EFFICACY OF PROPRIOCEPTIVE NEUROMUSCULAR FACILITATION (PNF) VS. MUSCLE SETTING EXERCISES FOR IMPROVING MOTOR RECOVERY IN POST-STROKE PATIENTS

Ahmed Z. Khan, Muhammad Anas, Iram Saddique, Subhan Ur Rehman Burki, Muhammad Usman Khan, Ayesha Sadiq
article en

Abstract

Background: Stroke is a leading cause of long-term disability worldwide, often resulting in impaired motor function, spasticity, and reduced functional independence. Effective rehabilitation is critical to improving outcomes and restoring quality of life for stroke survivors. Among the various therapeutic approaches, Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation (PNF) and muscle setting exercises are widely practiced, yet their comparative effectiveness remains inadequately explored. This study aimed to evaluate and compare the impact of these two interventions on motor recovery and spasticity reduction in post-stroke patients. Objective: To compare the effects of Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation (PNF) and muscle setting exercises on motor function, spasticity, and functional capacity in post-stroke rehabilitation. Methods: A randomized controlled trial was conducted at City Clinics, Lahore, involving 60 hemiparetic post-stroke patients aged 45–75 years. Participants were randomly assigned into two groups: PNF (n = 30) and muscle setting (n = 30). Each group underwent an intervention protocol of 18 sessions over six weeks, with therapy sessions conducted three times per week. The Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA), Modified Ashworth Scale (MAS), and Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) were used pre- and post-intervention to assess motor function, spasticity, and pain, respectively. Results: The PNF group showed a significant increase in FMA scores from 1.47 ± 0.51 to 3.57 ± 0.50 (p < 0.001), MAS scores rose from 1.00 to 2.90 ± 0.55 (p < 0.001), and NPRS scores decreased from 3.37 ± 0.49 to 1.20 ± 0.89 (p < 0.001). In the muscle setting group, FMA improved from 1.47 ± 0.51 to 1.90 ± 0.80, MAS from 1.47 ± 0.51 to 1.80 ± 0.93, and NPRS from 3.37 ± 0.49 to 2.57 ± 1.25 (all p < 0.05). Conclusion: PNF therapy demonstrated significantly greater improvements in motor function, reduced spasticity, and lower pain levels compared to muscle setting exercises. These findings support PNF as a more comprehensive and effective rehabilitation strategy for post-stroke patients.

Insights-Journal of Health and RehabilitationVol. 3(3 (Health & Rehabilitation))
Riphah International University (PK), Lady Reading Hospital (PK)
Openalex Percentile: Top 84%
Stroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.