Literature DB >> 12838090

Osteopathic manipulative treatment for chronic low back pain: a randomized controlled trial.

John C Licciardone1, Scott T Stoll, Kimberly G Fulda, David P Russo, Jeff Siu, William Winn, Jon Swift.   

Abstract

STUDY
DESIGN: A randomized controlled trial was conducted.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the efficacy of osteopathic manipulative treatment as a complementary treatment for chronic nonspecific low back pain. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Osteopathic manipulative treatment may be useful for acute or subacute low back pain. However, its role in chronic low back pain is unclear.
METHODS: This trial was conducted in a university-based clinic from 2000 through 2001. Of the 199 subjects who responded to recruitment procedures, 91 met the eligibility criteria. They were randomized, with 82 patients completing the 1-month follow-up evaluation, 71 completing the 3-month evaluation, and 66 completing the 6-month evaluation. The subjects were randomized to osteopathic manipulative treatment, sham manipulation, or a no-intervention control group, and they were allowed to continue their usual care for low back pain. The main outcomes included the SF-36 Health Survey, a 10-cm visual analog scale for overall back pain, the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire, lost work or school days because of back pain, and satisfaction with back care.
RESULTS: As compared with the no-intervention control subjects, the patients who received osteopathic manipulative treatment reported greater improvements in back pain, greater satisfaction with back care throughout the trial, better physical functioning and mental health at 1 month, and fewer cotreatments at 6 months. The subjects who received sham manipulation also reported greater improvements in back pain and physical functioning and greater satisfaction than the no-intervention control subjects. There were no significant benefits with osteopathic manipulative treatment, as compared with sham manipulation.
CONCLUSIONS: Osteopathic manipulative treatment and sham manipulation both appear to provide some benefits when used in addition to usual care for the treatment of chronic nonspecific low back pain. It remains unclear whether the benefits of osteopathic manipulative treatment can be attributed to the manipulative techniques themselves or whether they are related to other aspects of osteopathic manipulative treatment, such as range of motion activities or time spent interacting with patients, which may represent placebo effects.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12838090     DOI: 10.1097/01.BRS.0000067110.61471.7D

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)        ISSN: 0362-2436            Impact factor:   3.468


  49 in total

1.  Evidence-based protocol for structural rehabilitation of the spine and posture: review of clinical biomechanics of posture (CBP) publications.

Authors:  Paul A Oakley; Donald D Harrison; Deed E Harrison; Jason W Haas
Journal:  J Can Chiropr Assoc       Date:  2005-12

2.  Effect sizes of non-surgical treatments of non-specific low-back pain.

Authors:  A Keller; J Hayden; C Bombardier; M van Tulder
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2007-07-10       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  Responding to the challenge of clinically relevant osteopathic research: efficacy and beyond.

Authors:  John C Licciardone
Journal:  Int J Osteopath Med       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 2.149

Review 4.  A systematic review of measures used to assess chronic musculoskeletal pain in clinical and randomized controlled clinical trials.

Authors:  Leighann Litcher-Kelly; Sharon A Martino; Joan E Broderick; Arthur A Stone
Journal:  J Pain       Date:  2007-08-09       Impact factor: 5.820

5.  Usual care in back pain trials.

Authors:  Robert Froud; Martin Underwood
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 5.386

6.  Educating osteopaths to be researchers - what role should research methods and statistics have in an undergraduate curriculum?

Authors:  John C Licciardone
Journal:  Int J Osteopath Med       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 2.149

7.  A randomized control trial to determine the effectiveness and physiological effects of spinal manipulation and spinal mobilization compared to each other and a sham condition in patients with chronic low back pain: Study protocol for The RELIEF Study.

Authors:  Brian C Clark; David W Russ; Masato Nakazawa; Christopher R France; Stevan Walkowski; Timothy D Law; Megan Applegate; Niladri Mahato; Samuel Lietkam; James Odenthal; Daniel Corcos; Simeon Hain; Betty Sindelar; Robert J Ploutz-Snyder; James S Thomas
Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials       Date:  2018-05-21       Impact factor: 2.226

Review 8.  Imperfect placebos are common in low back pain trials: a systematic review of the literature.

Authors:  L A C Machado; S J Kamper; R D Herbert; C G Maher; J H McAuley
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2008-04-18       Impact factor: 3.134

9.  Pregnancy Research on Osteopathic Manipulation Optimizing Treatment Effects: the PROMOTE study.

Authors:  Kendi L Hensel; Steve Buchanan; Sarah K Brown; Mayra Rodriguez; des Anges Cruser
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2014-07-25       Impact factor: 8.661

10.  Spinal Manipulation Vs Sham Manipulation for Nonspecific Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Authors:  Jay K Ruddock; Hannah Sallis; Andy Ness; Rachel E Perry
Journal:  J Chiropr Med       Date:  2016-05-25
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.