Femoroacetabular Impingement SyndromeNCT07285876
The Effect of Sacroiliac and Lumbar Mobilizations Applied in Addition to Conventional Physical Therapy
A study testing Lumbosacral Mobilization and Conventional physical therapy in people with Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome, run by Fenerbahce University at 1 site in Turkey (Türkiye).
Trial summary
Femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) is defined as impingement caused by abnormal morphology between the femoral head-neck junction and the acetabulum in the hip joint (Aoyama et al., 2017). Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 15 to 55 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome
- What is being tested?
- Lumbosacral Mobilization and Conventional physical therapy
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 20 participants
- Where
- 1 siteTurkey (Türkiye)
- Study dates
- 2 May 2022to 31 Mar 2023
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 15 to 55 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Child, Adult
Who may be able to join
- Having been diagnosed with femoroacetabular impingement syndrome by the same orthopedic surgeon
- Having hip pain associated with femoroacetabular impingement syndrome
- Having femoroacetabular impingement syndrome morphology in the imaging methods used for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome diagnosis (Radiography, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Computed Tomography)
- Having improved cognitive function and be willing to participate in the study
- Having signed the informed consent form
Who cannot join
- Having received physical therapy for hip pathology within the last 3 months
- Having a history of lower limb and lumbar region surgery
- Having advanced hip osteoarthritis
- Having neurological findings such as radiculopathy or myelopathy
- Having rheumatic diseases (ankylosing spondylitis, rheumatoid arthritis)
- Having infectious diseases (sacroiliitis)
Show all 9Show fewer
- History of developmental and congenital hip dysplasia
- Fracture
- Pregnancy
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Turkey (Türkiye)1 site
Sportomed Sports Medicine and Orthopedic Rehabilitation Clinic
Istanbul
About this study
Official title: The Effect of Sacroiliac and Lumbar Mobilizations Applied in Addition to Conventional Physical Therapy on Pain, Balance, Neuromuscular Control, and Function in Patients With Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome
Femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) is defined as impingement caused by abnormal morphology between the femoral head-neck junction and the acetabulum in the hip joint (Aoyama et al., 2017). As a result of morphological changes, abnormal contact between the proximal femur and acetabulum leads to chondrolabral lesions and secondary hip osteoarthritis (Casartelli, Maffiuletti, Leunig, 2019; Pierannunzii L., 2017). Femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) is a clinical condition characterized by movement-related hip-groin pain that limits daily and athletic activities, accompanied by clinical findings, symptoms, and radiological findings associated with morphological changes (Brown-Taylor et al., 2022; Griffin et al., 2016). Symptoms typically appear suddenly and are associated with rotational and hip flexion movements that place stress on the joint (Nepple et al., 2013). The primary symptom is hip and/or groin pain related to movement or position. Typically, pain is related to activity during the acute phase, but in the chronic phase, it can occur with daily living activities or even at rest (Byrd, 2014; Nepple et al., 2013).
In patients with FAIS, reduced hip range of motion can be compensated by the pubic symphysis and sacroiliac joint (SIJ), and as a result of this compensation, hip dysfunction may develop due to increased stress on these structures. Studies describing the relationship between SIJ and FAIS are available in the literature. SIJ dysfunction causes asymmetry between the right and left innominate bones, altering the pelvic tilt angle. Excessive coverage of the femoral head by the acetabulum increases compression and creates a basis for labral tears. A study comparing postoperative pain and hip function in FAIS patients with and without SIJ anomalies showed that the group with SIJ anomalies had worse outcomes (Krishnamoorty et al., 2019).
Read more
In recent years, studies suggesting that pelvic posture and kinematics influence acetabular orientation have been increasing alongside the hip-spine concept (Krishnamoorty et al., 2019; Pierannunzii L., 2017). Although there are many similar studies in the literature examining the relationship between FAIS and the lumbopelvic junction, studies examining treatment options do not include a treatment approach targeting this relationship. While many researchers accept the value of conservative treatment methods for FAIS, there is insufficient published evidence on how this treatment should be applied.
This study was planned to investigate the effects of sacroiliac and lumbar mobilization as additional interventions to conventional physiotherapy on pain, balance, neuromuscular control, hip range of motion and hip function in patients with FAIS. The aim of our study was to include the surrounding joints that affect hip joint mechanics, as described in the literature, in the treatment program alongside physiotherapy applications, which are one of the conservative treatment methods. We also aimed to address the biomechanical limitations contributing to hip pain and dysfunction through a patient-centered approach and to evaluate their effect on the overall integrity and function of the hip and lumbopelvic joints and to evaluate its effect on the overall integrity and function of the hip and lumbopelvic joints. This study is the first to our knowledge and aims to shed light on whether patients with FAIS require more comprehensive manual therapy approaches based on the data obtained from the research.
- Conditions
- Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome
- Being tested
- Lumbosacral Mobilization, Conventional physical therapy
- Medical subject headings
- Femoracetabular Impingement
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Lumbosacral MobilizationOther
Sacroiliac joint: anterior ilium technique. The practitioner stabilized the sacrum. The fingers of the hand on the same side as the affected side were placed on the anterior iliac spine and the ilium was pulled upward over the sacrum.
Sacroiliac joint: posterior ilium technique. While the patient was lying prone, the affected side was determined using the spring test. The practitioner positioned the thenar eminence of the hand against the posterior protrusion of the ilium and applied a lateral push. While maintaining this push, the patient was asked to perform backward extension.
Lumbar region: Maitland postero-anterior technique. Grade II-III mobilization was applied to the lumbar region (L1-L5) in the postero-anterior direction. The practitioner placed the ulnar side of their hand, on the spinous process of the of the relevant segment with the wrist in extension. Using body weight, passive oscillations were performed directly on the relevant segment in the posteroanterior direction.
Conventional physical therapyOther
The conventional physical therapy applied to the control group included pain-targeted electrotherapy methods (Conventional transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, ice therapy, ultrasound therapy), hip mobilization techniques, hip strengthening exercises, core and trunk stabilization exercises, posture exercises, activity modification, and patient education.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Mobilization Group | Experimental | Not described Receives: Other: Lumbosacral Mobilization; Other: Conventional physical therapy |
| Conventional Physical Therapy Group | Active comparator | Not described Receives: Other: Conventional physical therapy |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Change from Baseline in the Normal Range of Hip Flexion at 6 Weeks
The normal range of motion of the hip joint was assessed using a universal goniometer. The patient was in the supine position while the movement was assessed. The movement being tested was demonstrated to the patient prior to measurement, and then the test was performed. When assessing hip flexion, the side being assessed was in knee flexion, while the other leg was in extension. The researcher stood beside the patient on the relevant side. The pivot point of the goniometer was placed on the patient's trochanter major. The fixed arm was placed toward the vertebral column, and the movable arm followed the lateral aspect of the femur. Three measurements were taken to assess joint movement. The average of the measurements was recorded.
Measured: From enrollment to the end of treatment at 6 weeks
Change from Baseline in the Normal Range of Hip Extention at 6 Weeks
The normal range of motion of the hip joint was assessed using a universal goniometer. The movement being tested was demonstrated to the patient prior to measurement, and then the test was performed. When assessing hip extension, the patient was in the prone position. The pivot point of the goniometer was placed on the patient's trochanter major. The fixed arm was placed toward the vertebral column, and the movable arm followed the lateral aspect of the femur. Three measurements were taken to assess joint movement. The average of the measurements was recorded.
Measured: From enrollment to the end of treatment at 6 weeks
Change from Baseline in the Normal Range of Hip Abduction at 6 Weeks
The normal range of motion of the hip joint was assessed using a universal goniometer. The patient was in the supine position while the hip abduction was assessed. The movement being tested was demonstrated to the patient prior to measurement, and then the test was performed. The researcher is beside the patient on the side being measured. The pivot point of the goniometer was placed on the projection of the trochanter major on the anterior surface of the femur. The fixed arm of the goniometer was held parallel to the anterior superior iliac spines. The movable arm followed the anterior midline of the femur. Attention was paid to avoid hip internal and external rotation when measuring. Three measurements were taken to assess joint movement. The average of the measurements was recorded.
Measured: From enrollment to the end of treatment at 6 weeks
Change from Baseline in the Normal Range of Hip Adduction at 6 Weeks
The normal range of motion of the hip joint was assessed using a universal goniometer. The patient was in the supine position while the hip adduction was assessed. The movement being tested was demonstrated to the patient prior to measurement, and then the test was performed. The researcher is beside the patient on the side being measured. The pivot point of the goniometer was placed on the projection of the trochanter major on the anterior surface of the femur. The fixed arm of the goniometer was held parallel to the anterior superior iliac spines. The movable arm followed the anterior midline of the femur. Attention was paid to avoid hip internal and external rotation when measuring. Three measurements were taken to assess joint movement. The average of the measurements was recorded.
Measured: From enrollment to the end of treatment at 6 weeks
Change from Baseline in the Normal Range of Hip External Rotation at 6 Weeks
When assessing hip external rotation, the patient is seated at the edge of the bed with knees flexed at 90°. The pivot point of the goniometer was placed on the tibial tuberosity. The fixed arm of the goniometer was positioned parallel to the floor. The movable arm followed the tibial crest. During measurement, care was taken to ensure there was no flexion, extension, abduction, or adduction movement in the hip. Three measurements were taken to assess joint movement. The average of the measurements was recorded.
Measured: From enrollment to the end of treatment at 6 weeks
Change from Baseline in the Normal Range of Hip Internal Rotation at 6 Weeks
When assessing hip internal rotation, the patient is seated at the edge of the bed with knees flexed at 90°. The pivot point of the goniometer was placed on the tibial tuberosity. The fixed arm of the goniometer was positioned parallel to the floor. The movable arm followed the tibial crest. During measurement, care was taken to ensure there was no flexion, extension, abduction, or adduction movement in the hip. Three measurements were taken to assess joint movement. The average of the measurements was recorded.
Measured: From enrollment to the end of treatment at 6 weeks
Change from Baseline in the Pain Severity at 6 Weeks
The Numeric Pain Scale (NPS) was used to assess pain. The NPS is a numerical measurement tool used to subjectively assess pain intensity. The scale is numbered from 0 to 10 on a horizontal line. '0' means no pain, '5' means moderate pain, and '10' means unbearable pain. The patients were asked to assess their pain based on the pain they experienced in the last 24 hours.
Measured: From enrollment to the end of treatment at 6 weeks
Change from Baseline in the Hip Function at 6 Weeks
Hip function level was assessed using the Hip Outcome Score (HOS). The HOS is a 26-item measure. This scale consists of 2 separate subscales. The subscale assessing activities of daily living consists of 19 questions. Seventeen of the questions were scored and evaluated out of 68 points. The subscale assessing sports activities consists of 9 questions. All 9 questions are included in the score and evaluated out of 36 points. The HOS is measured as a percentage using the daily living activities subscale (daily living activity score/68x100) and the sports activity subscale (sports activity score/36x100) and the total HOS score (Daily Living Activity Score + Sports Activity Score/104x100) were measured as a percentage.
Measured: From enrollment to the end of treatment at 6 weeks
Change from Baseline in the Neuromuscular Control and Balance at 6 Weeks
Neuromuscular control and balance were assessed using a modified version of the Star Excursion Balance Test (SEBT). The SEBT used in our study was modified to include the relevant aspects of hip function. Metric measuring tapes were affixed to a flat surface so that there was a 90° angle between the posterolateral and posteromedial directions and a 135° angle between the anterior and posterior directions. The participant stood at the midpoint of the metric measuring tapes. Before starting the test, each participant was taught the test requirements with 4 trials. Participants were given a 5-minute rest period after the trials before proceeding to the test. The participant was asked to extend as far as possible in the anterior, posteromedial, and posterolateral directions with one foot on the ground and the other foot in the air, then return to the starting position. After completing 3 error-free trials in each direction, the average of these measurements was recorded in centimeters.
Measured: From enrollment to the end of treatment at 6 weeks
Secondary outcomes (1)
Change from Baseline in the Lumbar and Sacroiliac Joint Mobility at 6 Weeks
Lumbar region and sacroiliac joint mobility were assessed using the modified Schober test. While the subject stood upright, a line connecting both superior posterior iliac spines was marked 10 cm above and 5 cm below. The subject was asked to bend forward as far as possible without bending the knees. The distance between the two marked points was measured, and the difference between the measurements in the upright position and the flexion position was recorded in centimeters as the modified Schober test value.
Measured: From enrollment to the end of treatment at 6 weeks
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted16 Dec 2025
- Study start2 May 2022
- Primary completion31 Mar 2023
- Study completion31 Mar 2023
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (10)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Femoroacetabular Impingement SyndromeStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Fenerbahce UniversityThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Triple blind
- Who is masked
- Participant, Investigator, Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 20 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Fenerbahce University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Baha Naci, Fenerbahce University
- Investigators
- Dilber Karagözoğlu Coşkunsu, Dr., Study chair, Fenerbahce University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07285876
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 2022-06/04
- Status last verified
- Dec 2025
- First submitted
- 3 Dec 2025
- Last updated
- 16 Dec 2025
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
Johansson AC, Karlsson H. The Star Excursion Balance Test: Criterion and divergent validity on patients with femoral acetabular impingement. Man Ther. 2016 Dec;26:104-109. doi: 10.1016/j.math.2016.07.015. Epub 2016 Aug 5.
PubMed 27525357Martin RL, Enseki KR, Draovitch P, Trapuzzano T, Philippon MJ. Acetabular labral tears of the hip: examination and diagnostic challenges. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2006 Jul;36(7):503-15. doi: 10.2519/jospt.2006.2135.
PubMed 16881467Casartelli NC, Valenzuela PL, Maffiuletti NA, Leunig M. Effectiveness of Hip Arthroscopy on Treatment of Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2021 Aug;73(8):1140-1145. doi: 10.1002/acr.24234. Epub 2021 Jul 5.
PubMed 32339441Sharma A, Alahmari K, Ahmed I. Efficacy of Manual Therapy versus Conventional Physical Therapy in Chronic Low Back Pain Due to Lumbar Spondylosis. A Pilot Study. Med Sci (Basel). 2015 Jun 26;3(3):55-63. doi: 10.3390/medsci3030055.
PubMed 29083391Ali MN, Sethi K, Noohu MM. Comparison of two mobilization techniques in management of chronic non-specific low back pain. J Bodyw Mov Ther. 2019 Oct;23(4):918-923. doi: 10.1016/j.jbmt.2019.02.020. Epub 2019 Feb 28.
PubMed 31733783Byrd JW. Femoroacetabular impingement in athletes: current concepts. Am J Sports Med. 2014 Mar;42(3):737-51. doi: 10.1177/0363546513499136. Epub 2013 Aug 27.
PubMed 23982400Krishnamoorthy VP, Beck EC, Kunze KN, Cancienne JM, Krivicich LM, Suppauksorn S, Ayeni OR, Nho SJ. Radiographic Prevalence of Sacroiliac Joint Abnormalities and Clinical Outcomes in Patients With Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome. Arthroscopy. 2019 Sep;35(9):2598-2605.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.arthro.2019.03.030.
PubMed 31500745Brown-Taylor L, Bordner H, Glaws K, Vasileff WK, Walrod B, Di Stasi S. Prevalence of low back pain and related disability in patients with femoroacetabular impingement syndrome. PM R. 2022 Jan;14(1):8-18. doi: 10.1002/pmrj.12572. Epub 2021 May 1.
PubMed 33583131Pierannunzii L. Pelvic posture and kinematics in femoroacetabular impingement: a systematic review. J Orthop Traumatol. 2017 Sep;18(3):187-196. doi: 10.1007/s10195-016-0439-2. Epub 2017 Feb 1.
PubMed 28150180Aoyama M, Ohnishi Y, Utsunomiya H, Kanezaki S, Takeuchi H, Watanuki M, Matsuda DK, Uchida S. A Prospective, Randomized, Controlled Trial Comparing Conservative Treatment With Trunk Stabilization Exercise to Standard Hip Muscle Exercise for Treating Femoroacetabular Impingement: A Pilot Study. Clin J Sport Med. 2019 Jul;29(4):267-275. doi: 10.1097/JSM.0000000000000516.
PubMed 31241527
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 16 Dec 2025. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- The Effect of Sacroiliac and Lumbar Mobilizations Applied in Addition to Conventional Physical Therapy on Pain, Balance, Neuromuscular Control, and Function in Patients With Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07285876
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 2022-06/04
- Conditions
- Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 20 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Fenerbahce UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 2 May 2022 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 31 Mar 2023 (actual)
- Study completion
- 31 Mar 2023 (actual)
- First posted
- 16 Dec 2025 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) is defined as impingement caused by abnormal morphology between the femoral head-neck junction and the acetabulum in the hip joint (Aoyama et al., 2017). As a result of morphological changes, abnormal contact between the proximal femur and acetabulum leads to chondrolabral lesions and secondary hip osteoarthritis (Casartelli, Maffiuletti, Leunig, 2019; Pierannunzii L., 2017). Femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) is a clinical condition characterized by movement-related hip-groin pain that limits daily and athletic activities, accompanied by clinical findings, symptoms, and radiological findings associated with morphological changes (Brown-Taylor et al., 2022; Griffin et al., 2016). Symptoms typically appear suddenly and are associated with rotational and hip flexion movements that place stress on the joint (Nepple et al., 2013). The primary symptom is hip and/or groin pain related to movement or position. Typically, pain is related to activity during the acute phase, but in the chronic phase, it can occur with daily living activities or even at rest (Byrd, 2014; Nepple et al., 2013).
In patients with FAIS, reduced hip range of motion can be compensated by the pubic symphysis and sacroiliac joint (SIJ), and as a result of this compensation, hip dysfunction may develop due to increased stress on these structures. Studies describing the relationship between SIJ and FAIS are available in the literature. SIJ dysfunction causes asymmetry between the right and left innominate bones, altering the pelvic tilt angle. Excessive coverage of the femoral head by the acetabulum increases compression and creates a basis for labral tears. A study comparing postoperative pain and hip function in FAIS patients with and without SIJ anomalies showed that the group with SIJ anomalies had worse outcomes (Krishnamoorty et al., 2019).
In recent years, studies suggesting that pelvic posture and kinematics influence acetabular orientation have been increasing alongside the hip-spine concept (Krishnamoorty et al., 2019; Pierannunzii L., 2017). Although there are many similar studies in the literature examining the relationship between FAIS and the lumbopelvic junction, studies examining treatment options do not include a treatment approach targeting this relationship. While many researchers accept the value of conservative treatment methods for FAIS, there is insufficient published evidence on how this treatment should be applied.
This study was planned to investigate the effects of sacroiliac and lumbar mobilization as additional interventions to conventional physiotherapy on pain, balance, neuromuscular control, hip range of motion and hip function in patients with FAIS. The aim of our study was to include the surrounding joints that affect hip joint mechanics, as described in the literature, in the treatment program alongside physiotherapy applications, which are one of the conservative treatment methods. We also aimed to address the biomechanical limitations contributing to hip pain and dysfunction through a patient-centered approach and to evaluate their effect on the overall integrity and function of the hip and lumbopelvic joints and to evaluate its effect on the overall integrity and function of the hip and lumbopelvic joints. This study is the first to our knowledge and aims to shed light on whether patients with FAIS require more comprehensive manual therapy approaches based on the data obtained from the research.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Triple blind (participant, investigator, outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Mobilization Group | Experimental | Other: Lumbosacral Mobilization, Other: Conventional physical therapy |
| Conventional Physical Therapy Group | Active comparator | Other: Conventional physical therapy |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 15 to 55 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Child, Adult
Key inclusion criteria (5 listed)
- Having been diagnosed with femoroacetabular impingement syndrome by the same orthopedic surgeon
- Having hip pain associated with femoroacetabular impingement syndrome
- Having femoroacetabular impingement syndrome morphology in the imaging methods used for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome diagnosis (Radiography, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Computed Tomography)
- Having improved cognitive function and be willing to participate in the study
- Having signed the informed consent form
Key exclusion criteria (9 listed)
- Having received physical therapy for hip pathology within the last 3 months
- Having a history of lower limb and lumbar region surgery
- Having advanced hip osteoarthritis
- Having neurological findings such as radiculopathy or myelopathy
- Having rheumatic diseases (ankylosing spondylitis, rheumatoid arthritis)
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Lumbosacral MobilizationSacroiliac joint: anterior ilium technique. The practitioner stabilized the sacrum. The fingers of the hand on the same side as the affected side were placed on the anterior iliac spine and the ilium was pulled upward over the sacrum. Sacroiliac joint: posterior ilium technique. While the patient was lying prone, the affected side was determined using the spring test. The practitioner positioned the thenar eminence of the hand against the posterior protrusion of the ilium and applied a lateral push. While maintaining this push, the patient was asked to perform backward extension. Lumbar region: Maitland postero-anterior technique. Grade II-III mobilization was applied to the lumbar region (L1-L5) in the postero-anterior direction. The practitioner placed the ulnar side of their hand, on the spinous process of the of the relevant segment with the wrist in extension. Using body weight, passive oscillations were performed directly on the relevant segment in the posteroanterior direction. | Other | Mobilization Group |
| Conventional physical therapyThe conventional physical therapy applied to the control group included pain-targeted electrotherapy methods (Conventional transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, ice therapy, ultrasound therapy), hip mobilization techniques, hip strengthening exercises, core and trunk stabilization exercises, posture exercises, activity modification, and patient education. | Other | Conventional Physical Therapy Group, Mobilization Group |
Primary outcome
Change from Baseline in the Normal Range of Hip Flexion at 6 Weeks
Time frame: From enrollment to the end of treatment at 6 weeks
The normal range of motion of the hip joint was assessed using a universal goniometer. The patient was in the supine position while the movement was assessed. The movement being tested was demonstrated to the patient prior to measurement, and then the test was performed. When assessing hip flexion, the side being assessed was in knee flexion, while the other leg was in extension. The researcher stood beside the patient on the relevant side. The pivot point of the goniometer was placed on the patient's trochanter major. The fixed arm was placed toward the vertebral column, and the movable arm followed the lateral aspect of the femur. Three measurements were taken to assess joint movement. The average of the measurements was recorded.
Change from Baseline in the Normal Range of Hip Extention at 6 Weeks
Time frame: From enrollment to the end of treatment at 6 weeks
The normal range of motion of the hip joint was assessed using a universal goniometer. The movement being tested was demonstrated to the patient prior to measurement, and then the test was performed. When assessing hip extension, the patient was in the prone position. The pivot point of the goniometer was placed on the patient's trochanter major. The fixed arm was placed toward the vertebral column, and the movable arm followed the lateral aspect of the femur. Three measurements were taken to assess joint movement. The average of the measurements was recorded.
Change from Baseline in the Normal Range of Hip Abduction at 6 Weeks
Time frame: From enrollment to the end of treatment at 6 weeks
The normal range of motion of the hip joint was assessed using a universal goniometer. The patient was in the supine position while the hip abduction was assessed. The movement being tested was demonstrated to the patient prior to measurement, and then the test was performed. The researcher is beside the patient on the side being measured. The pivot point of the goniometer was placed on the projection of the trochanter major on the anterior surface of the femur. The fixed arm of the goniometer was held parallel to the anterior superior iliac spines. The movable arm followed the anterior midline of the femur. Attention was paid to avoid hip internal and external rotation when measuring. Three measurements were taken to assess joint movement. The average of the measurements was recorded.
Change from Baseline in the Normal Range of Hip Adduction at 6 Weeks
Time frame: From enrollment to the end of treatment at 6 weeks
The normal range of motion of the hip joint was assessed using a universal goniometer. The patient was in the supine position while the hip adduction was assessed. The movement being tested was demonstrated to the patient prior to measurement, and then the test was performed. The researcher is beside the patient on the side being measured. The pivot point of the goniometer was placed on the projection of the trochanter major on the anterior surface of the femur. The fixed arm of the goniometer was held parallel to the anterior superior iliac spines. The movable arm followed the anterior midline of the femur. Attention was paid to avoid hip internal and external rotation when measuring. Three measurements were taken to assess joint movement. The average of the measurements was recorded.
Change from Baseline in the Normal Range of Hip External Rotation at 6 Weeks
Time frame: From enrollment to the end of treatment at 6 weeks
When assessing hip external rotation, the patient is seated at the edge of the bed with knees flexed at 90°. The pivot point of the goniometer was placed on the tibial tuberosity. The fixed arm of the goniometer was positioned parallel to the floor. The movable arm followed the tibial crest. During measurement, care was taken to ensure there was no flexion, extension, abduction, or adduction movement in the hip. Three measurements were taken to assess joint movement. The average of the measurements was recorded.
Change from Baseline in the Normal Range of Hip Internal Rotation at 6 Weeks
Time frame: From enrollment to the end of treatment at 6 weeks
When assessing hip internal rotation, the patient is seated at the edge of the bed with knees flexed at 90°. The pivot point of the goniometer was placed on the tibial tuberosity. The fixed arm of the goniometer was positioned parallel to the floor. The movable arm followed the tibial crest. During measurement, care was taken to ensure there was no flexion, extension, abduction, or adduction movement in the hip. Three measurements were taken to assess joint movement. The average of the measurements was recorded.
Change from Baseline in the Pain Severity at 6 Weeks
Time frame: From enrollment to the end of treatment at 6 weeks
The Numeric Pain Scale (NPS) was used to assess pain. The NPS is a numerical measurement tool used to subjectively assess pain intensity. The scale is numbered from 0 to 10 on a horizontal line. '0' means no pain, '5' means moderate pain, and '10' means unbearable pain. The patients were asked to assess their pain based on the pain they experienced in the last 24 hours.
Change from Baseline in the Hip Function at 6 Weeks
Time frame: From enrollment to the end of treatment at 6 weeks
Hip function level was assessed using the Hip Outcome Score (HOS). The HOS is a 26-item measure. This scale consists of 2 separate subscales. The subscale assessing activities of daily living consists of 19 questions. Seventeen of the questions were scored and evaluated out of 68 points. The subscale assessing sports activities consists of 9 questions. All 9 questions are included in the score and evaluated out of 36 points. The HOS is measured as a percentage using the daily living activities subscale (daily living activity score/68x100) and the sports activity subscale (sports activity score/36x100) and the total HOS score (Daily Living Activity Score + Sports Activity Score/104x100) were measured as a percentage.
Change from Baseline in the Neuromuscular Control and Balance at 6 Weeks
Time frame: From enrollment to the end of treatment at 6 weeks
Neuromuscular control and balance were assessed using a modified version of the Star Excursion Balance Test (SEBT). The SEBT used in our study was modified to include the relevant aspects of hip function. Metric measuring tapes were affixed to a flat surface so that there was a 90° angle between the posterolateral and posteromedial directions and a 135° angle between the anterior and posterior directions. The participant stood at the midpoint of the metric measuring tapes. Before starting the test, each participant was taught the test requirements with 4 trials. Participants were given a 5-minute rest period after the trials before proceeding to the test. The participant was asked to extend as far as possible in the anterior, posteromedial, and posterolateral directions with one foot on the ground and the other foot in the air, then return to the starting position. After completing 3 error-free trials in each direction, the average of these measurements was recorded in centimeters.
1 secondary outcome
Change from Baseline in the Lumbar and Sacroiliac Joint Mobility at 6 Weeks
Time frame: From enrollment to the end of treatment at 6 weeks
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 16 Dec 2025.
- Background: PubMed 27525357Johansson AC, Karlsson H. The Star Excursion Balance Test: Criterion and divergent validity on patients with femoral acetabular impingement. Man Ther. 2016 Dec;26:104-109. doi: 10.1016/j.math.2016.07.015. Epub 2016 Aug 5.
- Background: PubMed 16881467Martin RL, Enseki KR, Draovitch P, Trapuzzano T, Philippon MJ. Acetabular labral tears of the hip: examination and diagnostic challenges. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2006 Jul;36(7):503-15. doi: 10.2519/jospt.2006.2135.
- Background: PubMed 32339441Casartelli NC, Valenzuela PL, Maffiuletti NA, Leunig M. Effectiveness of Hip Arthroscopy on Treatment of Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2021 Aug;73(8):1140-1145. doi: 10.1002/acr.24234. Epub 2021 Jul 5.
- Background: PubMed 29083391Sharma A, Alahmari K, Ahmed I. Efficacy of Manual Therapy versus Conventional Physical Therapy in Chronic Low Back Pain Due to Lumbar Spondylosis. A Pilot Study. Med Sci (Basel). 2015 Jun 26;3(3):55-63. doi: 10.3390/medsci3030055.
- Background: PubMed 31733783Ali MN, Sethi K, Noohu MM. Comparison of two mobilization techniques in management of chronic non-specific low back pain. J Bodyw Mov Ther. 2019 Oct;23(4):918-923. doi: 10.1016/j.jbmt.2019.02.020. Epub 2019 Feb 28.
- Background: PubMed 23982400Byrd JW. Femoroacetabular impingement in athletes: current concepts. Am J Sports Med. 2014 Mar;42(3):737-51. doi: 10.1177/0363546513499136. Epub 2013 Aug 27.
- Background: PubMed 31500745Krishnamoorthy VP, Beck EC, Kunze KN, Cancienne JM, Krivicich LM, Suppauksorn S, Ayeni OR, Nho SJ. Radiographic Prevalence of Sacroiliac Joint Abnormalities and Clinical Outcomes in Patients With Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome. Arthroscopy. 2019 Sep;35(9):2598-2605.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.arthro.2019.03.030.
- Background: PubMed 33583131Brown-Taylor L, Bordner H, Glaws K, Vasileff WK, Walrod B, Di Stasi S. Prevalence of low back pain and related disability in patients with femoroacetabular impingement syndrome. PM R. 2022 Jan;14(1):8-18. doi: 10.1002/pmrj.12572. Epub 2021 May 1.
- Background: PubMed 28150180Pierannunzii L. Pelvic posture and kinematics in femoroacetabular impingement: a systematic review. J Orthop Traumatol. 2017 Sep;18(3):187-196. doi: 10.1007/s10195-016-0439-2. Epub 2017 Feb 1.
- Background: PubMed 31241527Aoyama M, Ohnishi Y, Utsunomiya H, Kanezaki S, Takeuchi H, Watanuki M, Matsuda DK, Uchida S. A Prospective, Randomized, Controlled Trial Comparing Conservative Treatment With Trunk Stabilization Exercise to Standard Hip Muscle Exercise for Treating Femoroacetabular Impingement: A Pilot Study. Clin J Sport Med. 2019 Jul;29(4):267-275. doi: 10.1097/JSM.0000000000000516.
- Related InfoLink provided by the sponsor.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome
Not yet recruiting
The Effectiveness of High-intensity Laser Therapy in Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome
Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome, Femoro-acetabular Impingement
Active, not recruiting
Can Perineal Post-Free Traction in Hip Arthroscopy Effectively Reduce Perineal Complications?
Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome
Recruiting
Comparison of Surgery With Prehabilitation, Direct Surgery and Rehabilitation for Patients With Femoroacetabular Impingement
Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome
Not yet recruitingObservational study
Mapping Joint Damage Patterns in Femoroacetabular Impingement
Femoro-acetabular Impingement (FAI)
Active, not recruiting
Early Feasibility Study of Cartilage Defect Repair
Osteoarthritis, Hip, Femoroacetabular Impingement
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Dilber Karagözoğlu Coşkunsu, Dr. study chair
Fenerbahce University
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Lumbosacral Mobilization and Conventional physical therapy in people with Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome, run by Fenerbahce University at 1 site in Turkey (Türkiye).
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 5 inclusion and 9 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 16 Dec 2025. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Turkey (Türkiye). Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Change from Baseline in the Normal Range of Hip Flexion at 6 Weeks (time frame: From enrollment to the end of treatment at 6 weeks). The study lists 9 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT07285876, which also lists 10 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 16 Dec 2025.