Skip to content

A Comparative Study of Pelvic Realignment Therapy Plus Mulligan Mobilization With Movement and Mulligan Mobilization With Movement Alone in Patients with Hip Osteoarthritis

Comparative efficacy of pericapsular soft tissue and pelvic realignment therapy and movement with mobilization (MWM) versus MWM on pain, function, and muscle strength in individuals with hip osteoarthritis: A Randomized controlled trial - NIL

Status
Active, not recruiting
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
CTRI
Registry ID
CTRI/2026/06/112668
Enrollment
66
Registered
2026-06-15
Start date
Unknown
Completion date
Unknown
Last updated
2026-06-22

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Health Condition 1: M169- Osteoarthritis of hip, unspecified

Interventions

Intervention1: pericapsular soft tissue and pelvic realingment therapy and movement with mobilisation: 1. Pelvic Realignment Exercise (Lower Back Mobility Exercise): The participant will assume a supi

Sponsors

Datta Meghe institute of higher education and research
Lead Sponsor

Eligibility

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: Participated aged 40-70 years with moderate hip OA (grade III on KL scale). All individuals experienced symptoms of chronic hip pain that lasted for more than 3 months, along with pain intensity score of over 4/10 on VAS scale. Only individuals voluntarily agreed to participate in study after signing an informed consent form were considered.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: Participants excluded included those suffering from hip osteoarthritis grade IV according to the Kellgren-Lawrence Classification System, those who have undergone hip arthroplasty surgery, or those who have experienced hip trauma within the past three months. Furthermore, those diagnosed with inflammatory joint conditions, those suffering from neurologic impairment involving the lower limb, and those with contraindication to manipulation therapy were also excluded from the study.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
primary ourcome 1. VAS 2. HOOS secondary outcome 1. hand-held dynamometer 2. HHS Timepoint: baseline, 6th week

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
1. hand-held dynamometer 2. HHS Timepoint: Baseline, 6th week

Countries

India

Contacts

Public ContactDr Subrat Samal

Ravi Nair Physiotherapy college, Datta Meghe Institute of Higher Education and Research (DU)

research4subrat@gmail.com9370435224

Outcome results

None listed

Source: CTRI (via WHO ICTRP) · Data processed: Jun 29, 2026