Literature DB >> 26954273

A Prescriptively Selected Nonthrust Manipulation Versus a Therapist-Selected Nonthrust Manipulation for Treatment of Individuals With Low Back Pain: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Megan Donaldson, Shannon Petersen, Chad Cook, Ken Learman.   

Abstract

STUDY
DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial.
BACKGROUND: Several studies that have investigated the effects of a therapist-selected versus a randomly assigned segmental approach have looked at immediate effects only for pain-related outcomes.
OBJECTIVES: To examine differences in outcomes following a therapist-selected nonthrust manipulation versus a prescriptively selected nonthrust manipulation in subjects with low back pain.
METHODS: Subjects with mechanically producible low back pain were randomly treated with nonthrust manipulation in a therapist-selected approach or a prescriptively selected approach. All subjects received a standardized home exercise program. Outcome measures included pain, disability, global rating of change, and patient acceptable symptom state. Analyses of covariance, chi-square tests, and Mann-Whitney U tests were used to determine differences between groups.
RESULTS: Sixty-three subjects were tracked for 6 months, during which subjects in both groups significantly improved. There were no differences between groups in pain, disability, or patient acceptable symptom state scores at 6 months. There was a significant difference in global rating of change scores favoring the therapist-selected manipulation group at 6 months.
CONCLUSION: This study measured long-term differences between a prescriptively selected nonthrust manipulation and a therapist-selected approach to nonthrust manipulation. In pain, disability, and patient acceptable symptom state there were no differences in outcomes, findings similar to studies of immediate effects. After 6 months, perceived well-being was significantly higher for those in the therapist-selected treatment group. The study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01940744). LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapy, level 1b.

Entities:  

Keywords:  joint mobilization; low back pain; manual therapy; outcomes

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26954273     DOI: 10.2519/jospt.2016.6318

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Orthop Sports Phys Ther        ISSN: 0190-6011            Impact factor:   4.751


  4 in total

1.  A randomized clinical trial comparing non-thrust manipulation with segmental and distal dry needling on pain, disability, and rate of recovery for patients with non-specific low back pain.

Authors:  D Griswold; F Gargano; K E Learman
Journal:  J Man Manip Ther       Date:  2019-02-09

2.  The effect on clinical outcomes when targeting spinal manipulation at stiffness or pain sensitivity: a randomized trial.

Authors:  Casper Glissmann Nim; Gregory Neil Kawchuk; Berit Schiøttz-Christensen; Søren O'Neill
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-09-03       Impact factor: 4.379

3.  Comparing targeted thrust manipulation with general thrust manipulation in patients with low back pain. A general approach is as effective as a specific one. A randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Christopher J McCarthy; Louise Potter; Jackie A Oldham
Journal:  BMJ Open Sport Exerc Med       Date:  2019-10-05

4.  The impact of pragmatic vs. prescriptive study designs on the outcomes of low back and neck pain when using mobilization or manipulation techniques: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Daniel Roenz; Jake Broccolo; Steven Brust; Jordan Billings; Alexander Perrott; Jeremy Hagadorn; Chad Cook; Joshua Cleland
Journal:  J Man Manip Ther       Date:  2017-11-20
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.