Autogenic inhibition versus reciprocal inhibition for lower cross syndrome

Effects of Autogenic Inhibition Versus Reciprocal Inhibition in Individuals With Lower Cross Syndrome

This trial tests whether autogenic inhibition or reciprocal inhibition techniques better reduce pain and improve function in adults aged 25–50 with lower cross syndrome.

Quick facts

• Phase: Not applicable
• Study type: Interventional
• Enrollment: 72 (estimated)
• Ages: 25 Years to 50 Years
• Sex: All
• Sponsor: Foundation University Islamabad (Academic / other)
• Locations: 1 site (Islamabad, Punjab Province)
• Trial ID: NCT07526051 on ClinicalTrials.gov

What this trial studies

Adults with clinically identified lower cross syndrome were randomly assigned to one of two intervention groups: Group A received autogenic inhibition (proprioceptive facilitation/PNF-style) techniques aimed at lengthening chronically shortened muscles, and Group B received reciprocal inhibition techniques with the same goal. Outcomes measured before and after the intervention included pain by VAS, functional disability by the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), muscular strength using a sphygmomanometer, and lumbar and hip range of motion using inclinometer and goniometer. Participants met screening criteria including four positive clinical tests and chronic low back pain >2 months, while those with osteoporosis, inflammatory arthritis, recent fractures, congenital hip dysplasia, or pregnancy were excluded. The interventions were delivered in-person at a single center and compared to determine which technique produces greater improvements in symptoms and mobility.

Who should consider this trial

Good fit: Ideal candidates are men and women age 25–50 with chronic (more than 2 months) low back pain and four positive screening tests consistent with lower cross syndrome.

Not a fit: Patients with conditions excluded from the trial—such as osteoporosis, inflammatory arthritis, recent fractures, congenital hip dysplasia, pregnancy—or those outside the 25–50 age range or with milder pain may not benefit from the study interventions.

Why it matters

Potential benefit: If successful, the better-performing technique could offer a simple, noninvasive way to reduce pain and improve strength and range of motion for people with lower cross syndrome.

How similar studies have performed: Previous research on PNF-style autogenic techniques and reciprocal inhibition has shown modest improvements in range of motion and pain for musculoskeletal conditions, but direct comparisons specifically in lower cross syndrome are limited.

Eligibility criteria

Inclusion Criteria:

* Both Males and Females will be included in our study Age 25-50 years Four positive screening tests (Thomas Test, Abdominal Strength Test, Glutues Maximus Test, Ely's Test) chronic Pain in lower Back Region (\>3 on VAS) lasting for more than 2 months

Exclusion Criteria:

* Osteoporosis Congenital Hip Dysplasia History of Fracture History of Inflammatory Arthritis Pregnancy

Where this trial is running

Islamabad, Punjab Province

• Foundation University College of Physical Therapy — Islamabad, Punjab Province, Pakistan (Recruiting)

Study contacts

• Principal investigator: Zobia Noor, DPT — Foundation University Islamabad
• Study coordinator: Zobia Noor, DPT

Conditions Lower Cross Syndrome