COMPARISON OF NERVE CONDUCTION STUDIES ON AFFECTED AND NON-AFFECTED SIDE IN THE PATIENTS OF SCIATICA
Background: Sciatic neuropathy is the one of the most common neuropathies of the lower extremities. Low-back pain (LBP) is a major health problem around the world and a major cause of medical expenses, absenteeism and disability. Although LBP is usually a self-limiting and benign condition that tend...
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Text |
| Language: | unknown |
| Published: |
Zenodo
2020
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://dx.doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4475046 https://zenodo.org/record/4475046 |
| Summary: | Background: Sciatic neuropathy is the one of the most common neuropathies of the lower extremities. Low-back pain (LBP) is a major health problem around the world and a major cause of medical expenses, absenteeism and disability. Although LBP is usually a self-limiting and benign condition that tends to improve spontaneously over time, a large variety of therapeutic interventions is available for treatment. Sciatica can result when the nerve roots in the lower spine are irritated or compressed. The aim of the study was to observe the effect of nerve conduction velocity in sciatica subjects. Method and materials: In this study we involved the participants either sexes; aged >21 years; treatment for LBP; in the acute, sub-acute or chronic phases, with sciatica. Patients were selected on the basis of routine clinical examination and complaint with pain during walking. The selected Patients initially send for Nerve conduction investigation in the department of Physiology. Nerve conduction study was done on RMS EMG EP Mark-II. The sites of stimulation for Sciatic nerves were ankle and at or below popliteal fossa and recording site were motor point of Extensor digitorumbrevis and Abductor Hallucis respectively. Reference electrode was placed 4 cm distally over 4 th metatarsophalangeal joint. Ground electrode was placed between stimulating and recording electrodes. Recording surface disc electrode was placed below lateral malleolus of ankle for sural nerve. Result: The mean value of latency was 3.152 + 0. 255 in normal side and it was 2.876 + 0.4002 on the affected side which was significantly decreased. Motor nerve conduction Velocity in the normal side was 51.27 + 3.98 and the Motor nerve conduction Velocity of sciatic patient was 47.34 + 5.659 on the affected side decreased significantly. Conclusion: In this study we concluded that, this will be helpful for the early detection of demyelination as well as it may be helpful for the detection of nerve injuries in the patient of sciatica. |
|---|