PTOtherJournal of physical therapy science2018

Effect of interferential current therapy on forward head posture.

Ye-Jin Choi, Hee-Jung Kim, Sun-Young Han and 1 others

PMID 29581658

WHAT IT FOUND

After 4 weeks of interferential current, the changes did not differ significantly between forward head posture and normal head posture groups, although forward head posture angles decreased within both groups, so this uncontrolled study cannot show that interferential current caused the changes.

Key findings

01The changes in forward head posture angle and acromion distances after interferential current therapy did not differ significantly between the forward head posture and normal head posture groups.

02In both groups, forward head posture angle decreased significantly after interferential current therapy.

STILL TO COME

How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTs

Read the rest of this summary

You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.

Already have one?

What it does not show

The paper describes only two posture groups that both received interferential current therapy, so there was no untreated control group. Only 15 participants were in each posture group, and the paper does not report randomisation, blinding, or a primary outcome. Participants had no history of neck or shoulder surgery in the past 6 months and no musculoskeletal problems, so the findings may not apply to patients with neck or shoulder conditions. The posture angle was measured with a photograph-based application and distances were measured with a ruler, but the paper does not report measurement reliability or error.

Declared interests

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

The easy way to misread this

Do not read the significant within-group decreases as proof that interferential current therapy improved posture. There was no untreated control group, and the change between the forward head posture group and the normal head posture group was not significant, so the study cannot separate treatment from time or measurement variability.

Read it on PubMed →