Title Page
Abstract
Contents
1. Introduction 13
1.1. Background and necessity 13
1.2. Purpose 17
1.3. Hypothesis 17
2. Theoretical Background 18
2.1. Anatomical structure of the Cervical 18
2.2. Muscles of the Cervical 19
3. Methods 21
3.1. Participants 21
3.2. Study procedures 22
3.3. Study methods(Interventions) 24
3.3.1. Specific Stabilization exercise using the Kaltenborn-Evjenth Concept 25
3.3.2. Eye-Cervical Re-Education Program(ECRP) 27
3.4. Assessment 29
3.4.1. Pain 29
3.4.2. Neck Disability Index(NDI) 30
3.4.3. Forced expiratory volume in one second(FEV1) 31
3.4.4. Cranio-cervical flexor test (CCFT) 32
3.4.5. Proprioception Test 33
3.4.6. Cervical Range of motion(CROM) Test 34
3.4.7. Cervical translatoric joint play 35
3.5. Statistical analysis 36
4. Results 37
4.1. General characteristics of participants and homogeneity tests 37
4.2. Comparison of the pain 38
4.3. Comparison of the NDI 40
4.4. Comparison of the FEV1 42
4.5. Comparison of the CCFT 44
4.6. Comparison of the Proprioception Test 46
4.6.1. Comparison of the Cervical flexion 46
4.6.2. Comparison of the Cervical Extension 48
4.6.3. Comparison of the Cervical Lt. Side bending 50
4.6.4. Comparison of the Cervical Rt. Side bending 52
4.7. Comparison of the Cervical Range of Motion (CROM) 54
4.7.1. Comparison of the Cervical flexion 54
4.7.2. Comparison of the Cervical Extension 56
4.7.3. Comparison of the Cervical Lt. Side bending 58
4.7.4. Comparison of the Cervical Rt. side bending 60
4.7.5. Comparison of the Cervical Lt. rotation 62
4.7.6. Comparison of the Cervical Rt. rotation 64
4.8. Comparison of the cervical translatoric joint play 66
5. Discussion 68
6. Conclusion 72
List of references 75
List of abbreviations 83
Appendces 86
7.1. Neck Disability Index(NDI) (Korean ver.) 86
7.2. Neck Disability Index(NDI) (English ver.) This questionnaire has been designed to give us infor 89
7.3. Abstract(Korean) 92
7.4. Agreement to Participate in Research(Korean ver.) 94
7.5. Agreement to Participate in Research(English ver.) 95
7.6. Explanation for the subject agreement(Korean Ver.) 96
7.7. Explanation for the participant agreement(English Ver.) 98
Table 1. Intervention details 24
Table 2. General characteristics of participants and homogeneity tests 37
Table 3. Comparison of the VAS between the experimental and control groups 38
Table 4. Comparison of the NDI between the experimental and control groups 40
Table 5. Comparison of the FEV1 between the experimental and control groups 42
Table 6. Comparison of the CCFT between the experimental and control groups 44
Table 7. Comparison of the Cervical flexion proprioception between the experimental and control groups 46
Table 8. Comparison of the Cervical extension proprioception between the experimental and control groups 48
Table 9. Comparison of the cervical Lt. side bending proprioception between the experimental and control groups 50
Table 10. Comparison of the Rt. side bending proprioception between the experimental and control groups 52
Table 11. Comparison of the cervical flexion ROM between the experimental and control groups 54
Table 12. Comparison of the cervical extension ROM between the experimental and control groups 56
Table 13. Comparison of the cervical Lt. side bending ROM between the experimental and control groups 58
Table 14. Comparison of the cervical Rt. side bending ROM between the experimental and control groups 60
Table 15. Comparison of the cervical Lt. rotation ROM between the experimental and control groups 62
Table 16. Comparison of the cervical Rt. rotation ROM between the experimental and control groups 64
Table 17. Comparison of the cervical translatoric joint play between the experimental and control groups 66
Figure 1. Study flow chart 23
Figure 2. Keltenborn-Evjenth Concept Specific Stabilization Exercise 26
Figure 3. Eye-Cervical Re-Education Program 28
Figure 4. Visual Analog Scale(VAS) 29
Figure 5. COPD-6 (Ireland) 31
Figure 6. Pressure bio feedback unit(Chattanooga, USA) 32
Figure 7. Cervical Range of motion(CROM) Test 34
Figure 8. Cervical Translatoric Joint Play 35
Figure 9. Comparison of the VAS scores between the experimental and control groups 39
Figure 10. Comparison of the NDI between the experimental and control groups 41
Figure 11. Comparison of the FEV1 between the experimental and control groups 43
Figure 12. Comparison of the CCFT between the experimental and control groups 45
Figure 13. Comparison of the cervical flexion proprioception between the experimental and control groups 47
Figure 14. Comparison of the cervical extension proprioception between the experimental and control groups 49
Figure 15. Comparison of the cervical Lt. side bending proprioception between the experimental and control groups 51
Figure 16. Comparison of the cervical Rt. side bending proprioception between the experimental and control groups 53
Figure 17. Comparison of the cervical flexion ROM between the experimental and control groups 55
Figure 18. Comparison of the cervical extension ROM between the experimental and control groups 57
Figure 19. Comparison of the cervical Lt. side bending ROM between the experimental and control groups 59
Figure 20. Comparison of the cervical Rt. side bending ROM between the experimental and control groups 61
Figure 21. Comparison of the cervical Lt. rotation ROM between the experimental and control groups 63
Figure 22. Comparison of the cervical Lt. rotation ROM between the experimental and control groups 65
Figure 23. Comparison of the cervical translatoric joint play between the experimental and control groups 67