A comparison of mobilization and mobilization with movement on pain and range of motion in people with lateral ankle sprain: A randomized clinical trial

BackgroundMaitland and Mulligan mobilization techniques are two manual therapy methods to increase the range of motion following immobility treatment. The present study was conducted to compare two therapeutic methods, namely mobilization and mobilization with movement (MWM), on the pain and range of motion in people with lateral ankle sprain.MethodsA total of 40 individuals with grade two lateral ankle sprain were randomly divided into two groups, including the Maitland's mobilization intervention group, and the Mulligan's mobilization intervention group. Both groups underwent treatment every other day for two consecutive weeks. The pain intensity was measured using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), and the ankle dorsiflexion movement range using the Weight Bearing Lunge Test (WBLT) before and one day after the intervention.ResultsThere were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of pain (P = 0.297) and range of motion (P = 0.294) before the intervention. Meanwhile, after the intervention, a significant change was observed in both groups in terms of these variables, which indicates the effectiveness of both interventions (P < 0.001) and the greater effect of the mobilization with movement in reducing pain (P = 0.037) and increasing the range of motion (P = 0.021).ConclusionsBoth techniques significantly improved the range of motion and reduced pain in people with lateral ankle sprain, but Mulligan's technique was significantly more effective among the two, perhaps due to joining active and passive mobilizing tensile forces as well as interaction of afferents and efferents in the reflex arc.