Literature DB >> 19561560

Massage for low back pain: an updated systematic review within the framework of the Cochrane Back Review Group.

Andrea D Furlan1, Marta Imamura, Trish Dryden, Emma Irvin.   

Abstract

STUDY
DESIGN: Systematic Review.
OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of massage therapy for nonspecific low back pain. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Low back pain is one of the most common and costly musculoskeletal problems in modern society. Proponents of massage therapy claim it can minimize pain and disability, and speed return to normal function.
METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL from their beginning to May 2008. We also searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library 2006, issue 3), HealthSTAR and Dissertation abstracts up to 2006. There were no language restrictions. References in the included studies and in reviews of the literature were screened. The studies had to be randomized or quasi-randomized trials investigating the use of any type of massage (using the hands or a mechanical device) as a treatment for nonspecific low back pain. Two review authors selected the studies, assessed the risk of bias using the criteria recommended by the Cochrane Back Review Group, and extracted the data using standardized forms. Both qualitative and meta-analyses were performed.
RESULTS: Thirteen randomized trials were included. Eight had a high risk and 5 had a low risk of bias. One study was published in German and the rest in English. Massage was compared to an inert therapy (sham treatment) in 2 studies that showed that massage was superior for pain and function on both short- and long-term follow-ups. In 8 studies, massage was compared to other active treatments. They showed that massage was similar to exercises, and massage was superior to joint mobilization, relaxation therapy, physical therapy, acupuncture, and self-care education. One study showed that reflexology on the feet had no effect on pain and functioning. The beneficial effects of massage in patients with chronic low back pain lasted at least 1 year after the end of the treatment. Two studies compared 2 different techniques of massage. One concluded that acupuncture massage produces better results than classic (Swedish) massage and another concluded that Thai massage produces similar results to classic (Swedish) massage.
CONCLUSION: Massage might be beneficial for patients with subacute and chronic nonspecific low back pain, especially when combined with exercises and education. The evidence suggests that acupuncture massage is more effective than classic massage, but this need confirmation. More studies are needed to confirm these conclusions, to assess the impact of massage on return-to-work, and to determine cost-effectiveness of massage as an intervention for low back pain.

Entities:  

Year:  2009        PMID: 19561560     DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181ad7bd6

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


  39 in total

1.  Placebo response to manual therapy: something out of nothing?

Authors:  Joel E Bialosky; Mark D Bishop; Steven Z George; Michael E Robinson
Journal:  J Man Manip Ther       Date:  2011-02

2.  A systematic review and meta-analysis of efficacy, cost-effectiveness, and safety of selected complementary and alternative medicine for neck and low-back pain.

Authors:  Andrea D Furlan; Fatemeh Yazdi; Alexander Tsertsvadze; Anita Gross; Maurits Van Tulder; Lina Santaguida; Joel Gagnier; Carlo Ammendolia; Trish Dryden; Steve Doucette; Becky Skidmore; Raymond Daniel; Thomas Ostermann; Sophia Tsouros
Journal:  Evid Based Complement Alternat Med       Date:  2011-11-24       Impact factor: 2.629

3.  A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial of Naproxen With or Without Orphenadrine or Methocarbamol for Acute Low Back Pain.

Authors:  Benjamin W Friedman; David Cisewski; Eddie Irizarry; Michelle Davitt; Clemencia Solorzano; Adam Nassery; Scott Pearlman; Deborah White; E John Gallagher
Journal:  Ann Emerg Med       Date:  2017-10-28       Impact factor: 5.721

4.  Physical therapy for chronic low back pain in North Carolina: overuse, underuse, or misuse?

Authors:  Janet K Freburger; Timothy S Carey; George M Holmes
Journal:  Phys Ther       Date:  2011-02-17

5.  Clinimetrics corner: the many faces of selection bias.

Authors:  Eric J Hegedus; Jennifer Moody
Journal:  J Man Manip Ther       Date:  2010-06

6.  A SMART design to determine the optimal treatment of chronic pain among military personnel.

Authors:  Diane Flynn; Linda H Eaton; Dale J Langford; Nicholas Ieronimakis; Honor McQuinn; Richard O Burney; Samuel L Holmes; Ardith Z Doorenbos
Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials       Date:  2018-08-24       Impact factor: 2.226

7.  Individualized chiropractic and integrative care for low back pain: the design of a randomized clinical trial using a mixed-methods approach.

Authors:  Kristine K Westrom; Michele J Maiers; Roni L Evans; Gert Bronfort
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2010-03-08       Impact factor: 2.279

8.  Effectiveness of manual therapies: the UK evidence report.

Authors:  Gert Bronfort; Mitch Haas; Roni Evans; Brent Leininger; Jay Triano
Journal:  Chiropr Osteopat       Date:  2010-02-25

9.  Integrative care for the management of low back pain: use of a clinical care pathway.

Authors:  Michele J Maiers; Kristine K Westrom; Claire G Legendre; Gert Bronfort
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2010-10-29       Impact factor: 2.655

10.  The Nordic back pain subpopulation program--individual patterns of low back pain established by means of text messaging: a longitudinal pilot study.

Authors:  Alice Kongsted; Charlotte Leboeuf-Yde
Journal:  Chiropr Osteopat       Date:  2009-11-17
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.