Comparison of facial distortion model (FDM) and instrument assisted soft tissue mobilization (İASTM) techniques after arthroscopic meniscus repair

In this randomized controlled study, our aim was to compare pain, joint range of motion, hamstring flexibility, muscle strength, general condition and functional status of the knee in patients who underwent Facial Distortion Model (FDM) and Instrument Assisted Soft Tissue Mobilization (İASTM) in the rehabilitation of arthroscopic meniscus repair. In this study; 33 participants were randomly divided into 3 groups. From the first postoperative day, quadriceps femoris isometric, straight leg raise, knee flexion and ankle pumping exercises were given by the physiotherapist who managed the rehabilitation process. At the beginning, the general knee status of the individuals who received only exercise training for 4 weeks was evaluated with the Lysholm questionnaire, the pain level by VAS, the range of motion by universal goniometer, hamstring flexibility by sit and reach test, the condition of the meniscus and functional level of the knee with the WOMET questionnaire, and the muscle strength by measuring the digital dynamometer. The FDM (n=11) triggerband technique was applied to the first group, and the IASTM (Graston) (n=11) myofascial release technique to the second group. The third group continued to apply only the exercise program and became the control group (n=11). Eight sessions of ten-minute practice were carried out, two sessions per week. Evaluations were made before starting the treatment, after the first session and after the last session. We compared pain, limitation of joint movement, hamstring flexibility, muscle strength, general condition and functional status of the knee between those who underwent FDM and IASTM in the rehabilitation of arthroscopic meniscus repair. Among the evaluation parameters in this study, hamstring flexibility (p<0.001), joint range of motion (p=0.029), knee general condition (Lysholm p=0.037) and functional status (WOMET p=0.019) were found to be higher in the FDM group and İASTM groups compared to the control group. It was determined that they were effective but there was no superiority among themselves. At the end of the first session, the IASTM group was found to be superior to the FDM group in pain at rest (p=0.001) and pain with activity (p=0.012). Although FDM and IASTM could not provide any superiority over each other in the last session in night pain, it was observed that the FDM group was superior to the control group (p=0.03). It was found that the FDM group was superior to the control group in the Hamstring/Quadriceps strength ratio (p=0.019). In the rehabilitation of arthroscopic meniscus repair, it was observed that the additional application of FDM and IASTM applications to exercise therapy after the 4th week contributed positively to the treatment, but could not provide a pure superiority over each other. KEYWORDS: Arthroscopic Meniscus Repair, Facial Distortion Model, Instrument Assisted Soft Tissue Mobilization, Range of Motion, Hamstring Flexibilty,