dc.contributor.author | Demirkan, M. Yusuf | |
dc.contributor.author | Oral, M. Ayhan | |
dc.contributor.author | Çobanoğlu, Gamze | |
dc.contributor.author | Güzel, Nevin A. | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2025-08-05T11:12:21Z | |
dc.date.available | 2025-08-05T11:12:21Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2025 | en_US |
dc.identifier.citation | Demirkan, M. Y., Oral, M. A., Cobanoglu, G., & Guzel, N. A. (2025). Effects of two mobilization with movement techniques to the talocrural joint in individuals with dorsiflexion limitation: clinician vs self-applied. Physiotherapy Theory and Practice, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1080/09593985.2025.2496776 | en_US |
dc.identifier.issn | 0959-3985 | |
dc.identifier.issn | 1532-5040 | |
dc.identifier.uri | https://doi.org/10.1080/09593985.2025.2496776 | |
dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/11436/10803 | |
dc.description.abstract | Introduction: Dorsiflexion (DF) range of motion (ROM) limitation is a risk factor for many injuries. Many interventions are applied to individuals with DF limitation to increase DF-ROM. Purpose: To investigate the effects of single-session Clinician and Self-applied Mobilization with Movement (C-MWM and S-MWM) methods on DF-ROM, balance, and jump. Methods: The Weight Bearing Lunge Test was used to assess DF-ROM. Individuals with DF-ROM below 45 degrees were defined as having DF limitation. Forty-eight individuals were randomly assigned to C-MWM, S-MWM, and control groups. Balance was assessed with Y-Balance Test (YBT), and jumping was evaluated by a single-leg countermovement jump test. Clinicians mobilized participants in the C-MWM group, while those in the S-MWM group were mobilized with the help of a non-elastic belt. Those in the control group performed only lunge movements. Results: An increase in DF-ROM was observed in the C-MWM (d = 0.66, p = .001) and S-MWM groups (d = 0.53, p = .001). In YBT, anterior (C-MWM: d = 0.53, p = .001; S-MWM: d = 0.47, p = .028), posteromedial (C-MWM: d = 0.44, p = .023; S-MWM: d = 0.40, p = .011), and composite scores (C-MWM: d = 0.65, p = .004; S-MWM: d = 0.32, p = .013) improved in C-MWM and S-MWM groups. There was no significant difference in the posterolateral direction in all groups (p > .05). In the control group, there was a change only in composite score (d = 0.38, p = .016). There was no change in a jump in three groups (p > .05). When the gains obtained in groups were compared, it was observed that the gains in all parameters were similar (p > .05). Conclusion: When it is desired to increase DF-ROM and improve balance in individuals with DF limitation, the clinician or self can apply MWM to the talocrural joint. | en_US |
dc.language.iso | eng | en_US |
dc.publisher | Taylor and Francis Ltd. | en_US |
dc.rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccess | en_US |
dc.subject | Talocrural joint | en_US |
dc.subject | Manual therapy | en_US |
dc.subject | Range of motion | en_US |
dc.subject | Postural balance | en_US |
dc.subject | Jump | en_US |
dc.title | Effects of two mobilization with movement techniques to the talocrural joint in individuals with dorsiflexion limitation: clinician vs self-applied | en_US |
dc.type | article | en_US |
dc.contributor.department | RTEÜ, Güneysu Fizik Tedavi ve Rehabilitasyon Yüksekokulu, Fizyoterapi ve Rehabilitasyon Bölümü | en_US |
dc.contributor.institutionauthor | Çobanoğlu, Gamze | |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1080/09593985.2025.2496776 | en_US |
dc.relation.journal | Physiotherapy Theory and Practice | en_US |
dc.relation.publicationcategory | Makale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanı | en_US |