Zeynal Yasacı

Dr. Zeynal Yasacı

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

9Years (2018-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
30 April 2018 in ADDICTA: The Turkish Journal on Addictions
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
RMRüstem Mustafaoğlu
Rüstem Mustafaoğlu
EZEmrah Zirek
Emrah Zirek
ZYZeynal Yasacı
Zeynal Yasacı
AÖArzu Razak Özdinçler
Arzu Razak Özdinçler
Today, children and adolescents are growing up exposed to both traditional and modern technology. While it is known that the increase in the use of traditional technology, such as television and its content, have negative effects on children’s development and health, studies have shown such modern technologies as smartphones, tablets, and computers that have been developed and become increasingly widespread over the past decade to be beneficial and to constitute health risks for children. It seems that children’s inappropriate use of such technological devices in terms of content, duration, frequency, and the posture they adopt while using them pose a variety of health risks, including developmental problems, musculoskeletal problems, physical inactivity, obesity, and inadequate sleep quality. This study reviews the literature on the clinical problems that digital technology use has on children. In order for children and adolescents to adopt a healthy life style, it is important to monitor the time, frequency, and content viewed while using technological devices and to ensure that children have or develop adequate physical activity opportunities, healthy eating habits, proper sleep cycles, and a nurturing social environment.

1 January 2021 in The Korean Journal of Pain
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
RMRustem Mustafaoglu
Rustem Mustafaoglu
ZYZeynal Yasacı
Zeynal Yasacı
EZEmrah Zirek
Emrah Zirek
Mark D GriffithsMark D Griffiths
Mark D Griffiths
AOArzu Razak Ozdincler
Arzu Razak Ozdincler
Rustem Mustafaoglu, Zeynal Yasaci, Emrah Zirek, Mark D. Griffiths, and Arzu Razak Ozdincler. Korean J Pain 2021;34:72-81. https://doi.org/10.3344/kjp.2021.34.1.72

1 October 2020 in Musculoskeletal Science and Practice
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
EZEmrah Zirek
Emrah Zirek
RMRustem Mustafaoglu
Rustem Mustafaoglu
ZYZeynal Yasacı
Zeynal Yasacı
MGMark D. Griffiths
Mark D. Griffiths

8 January 2021 in Disability and Rehabilitation
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
SASezen Karaborklu Argut
Sezen Karaborklu Argut
DCDerya Celik
Derya Celik
ZYZeynal Yasacı
Zeynal Yasacı
To present an evidence-based overview of the current utilization and the effectiveness of therapeutic Electromyographic Biofeedback (EMG-BF) in rehabilitation after orthopedic knee surgeries. This ...

24 February 2023 in Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
DÇDerya Çelik
Derya Çelik
ZYZeynal Yasacı
Zeynal Yasacı
AEAli Erşen
Ali Erşen

17 September 2024 in Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
ZYZeynal Yasacı
Zeynal Yasacı
DCDerya Celik
Derya Celik
Background: Despite the availability of numerous treatment modalities for frozen shoulder, spanning from nonsurgical approaches to surgical interventions, a consensus regarding the most effective treatment remains elusive. Current studies emphasize that pain in frozen shoulder affects central nervous system activity and leads to changes in cortical structures, which are responsible for processing sensory information (like pain) and controlling motor functions (like movement). These cortical changes highlight the importance of including the central nervous system in the management of frozen shoulder. It is therefore recommended that treatment should provide more effective management by focusing not only on the shoulder region but also on the cortical areas thought to be affected. Questions/purposes: Among patients treated nonsurgically for frozen shoulder, is graded motor imagery added to a multimodal physical therapy program more effective than multimodal physical therapy alone in terms of (1) Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) scores, (2) pain with activities and QuickDASH (Q-DASH) scores, and (3) ROM after 8 weeks of treatment? Methods: In this randomized clinical trial, we considered the following as eligible for inclusion: (1) ROM < 50% compared with the unaffected shoulder, (2) clinically and radiologically confirmed primary frozen shoulder, and (3) 30% loss of joint ROM in at least two planes compared with the unaffected shoulder. Diagnosis of patients was based on patient history, symptoms, clinical examination, and exclusion of other conditions. A total of 38 patients with frozen shoulder were randomly assigned to either the graded motor imagery group (n = 19) or the multimodal physiotherapy group (n = 19). The groups did not differ in age, height, weight, gender, and dominant and affected side. In both groups, there were no losses to follow-up during the study period, and there was no crossover between groups. The multimodal physiotherapy program encompassed a variety of treatments, including stretching exercises, ROM exercises, joint-oriented mobilization techniques, scapular mobilization, strengthening exercises, and the application of cold agents. The graded motor imagery program, as an addition to the multimodal physiotherapy program, included the following steps: (1) left-right discrimination (identifying left and right body parts), (2) motor imagery (mentally visualizing movements), and (3) mirror therapy training (using mirrors to trick the brain into thinking the affected part is moving). Both groups of patients participated in a program of 12 sessions, each lasting approximately 45 minutes, twice a week for 6 weeks. Participants were assessed at baseline, after 6 weeks, and at 8 weeks. The primary outcome was the SPADI score, which ranges from 0 to 100, with higher values denoting greater disability. The minimum clinically important difference (MCID) for SPADI scores is reported to be 13.2 points. Secondary outcomes were shoulder ROM, Numeric Pain Rating Scale activity score (scored from 0 points, indicating “no pain,” to 10 points, indicating “worst pain imaginable”), and Q-DASH score (ranging from 0 to 100 points, with a higher score indicating higher functional disability). Repeated-measures analysis of variance was used to compare means between one or more variables based on repeated observations. Results: After 8 weeks of treatment, patients treated with graded motor imagery plus multimodal physical therapy experienced greater mean ± SD improvement from baseline in terms of SPADI scores than did the multimodal physical therapy group (65 ± 9 versus 55 ± 12, mean difference 10 points [95% confidence interval 4 to 17 points]; p = 0.01). Graded motor imagery when added to standard therapy did not produce a clinically important difference in pain scores with activity compared with physical therapy alone (7.0 ± 1.3 versus 5.9 ± 1.4, mean difference 1 point [95% CI 0.2 to 2.0 points], which was below our prespecified MCID; p = 0.04). However, improvements in Q-DASH score at 8 weeks were superior in the graded motor imagery group by a clinically important margin (58 ± 6 versus 50 ± 10, mean difference 9 points [95% CI 3 to 14 points], which was below our prespecified MCID; p = 0.01). ROM was generally better in the group that received the program augmented by graded motor imagery, but the differences were generally small. Conclusion: Adding graded motor imagery to a multimodal physiotherapy program was clinically superior to multimodal physiotherapy alone in improving function in patients with frozen shoulder. However, no clinically superior scores were achieved in ROM or activity-related pain. Additionally, the follow-up period was short, considering the tendency of frozen shoulder to recur. Although adding graded motor imagery provides superiority in many scores and does not require high-budget equipment, the disadvantages such as the difference in some scores being sub-MCID and the need for expertise and experience should not be ignored. Consequently, while graded motor imagery shows promise, further research with longer follow-up periods is recommended to fully understand its benefits and limitations in the treatment of frozen shoulder. Level of Evidence: Level I, therapeutic study.