Objective: Spinal Manipulative Therapy (SMT) is a routinely applied treatment modality for various musculoskeletal conditions, including low back pain. The precise mechanisms by which SMT elicits its effects are largely unknown, but recent research supports a multi-system explanation recognizing both biomechanical and neurophysiological mechanisms. Although the evaluation of changes in clinical presentation is complex, objective neurophysiological measures of sensitivity to movement (e.g. neurodynamic tests) can be a valuable clinical indicator in evaluating the effects of SMT. This review aimed to synthesize current literature investigating the effects of SMT on lower limb neurodynamics.Method: Eight electronic databases were systematically searched for randomized controlled trials (RCT) that applied SMT (against any control) and evaluated lower limb neurodynamics (Passive Straight Leg Raise or Slump Test). Selection and data extraction were conducted by one researcher, reviewed by a second author. Risk of bias (RoB) was assessed using the Cochrane Back Review Group criteria. Results: Eight RCTs were included, one with high RoB. SMT produced a clinically meaningful (≥6⁰) difference in five of these studies compared with inert control, hamstring stretching, and as an adjunct to conventional physiotherapy, but not compared with standard care, as an adjunct to home exercise and advice, or when comparing different SMT techniques. Findings compared to sham were mixed. When reported, effects tentatively lasted up to 6 weeks post-intervention. Conclusion: Limited evidence suggests SMT-improved range of motion and was more effective than some other interventions. Future research, using standardized Neurodynamic tests, should explore technique types and evaluate longer-term effects.Level of Evidence: 1a.
Objective: Spinal Manipulative Therapy (SMT) is a routinely applied treatment modality for various musculoskeletal conditions, including low back pain. The precise mechanisms by which SMT elicits its effects are largely unknown, but recent research supports a multi-system explanation recognizing both biomechanical and neurophysiological mechanisms. Although the evaluation of changes in clinical presentation is complex, objective neurophysiological measures of sensitivity to movement (e.g. neurodynamic tests) can be a valuable clinical indicator in evaluating the effects of SMT. This review aimed to synthesize current literature investigating the effects of SMT on lower limb neurodynamics.Method: Eight electronic databases were systematically searched for randomized controlled trials (RCT) that applied SMT (against any control) and evaluated lower limb neurodynamics (Passive Straight Leg Raise or Slump Test). Selection and data extraction were conducted by one researcher, reviewed by a second author. Risk of bias (RoB) was assessed using the Cochrane Back Review Group criteria. Results: Eight RCTs were included, one with high RoB. SMT produced a clinically meaningful (≥6⁰) difference in five of these studies compared with inert control, hamstring stretching, and as an adjunct to conventional physiotherapy, but not compared with standard care, as an adjunct to home exercise and advice, or when comparing different SMT techniques. Findings compared to sham were mixed. When reported, effects tentatively lasted up to 6 weeks post-intervention. Conclusion: Limited evidence suggests SMT-improved range of motion and was more effective than some other interventions. Future research, using standardized Neurodynamic tests, should explore technique types and evaluate longer-term effects.Level of Evidence: 1a.
Entities:
Keywords:
Low back pain; passive straight leg raise; randomized controlled trials; spinal manipulation; spinal mobilization
Authors: Daniëlle Awm van der Windt; Emmanuel Simons; Ingrid I Riphagen; Carlo Ammendolia; Arianne P Verhagen; Mark Laslett; Walter Devillé; Rick A Deyo; Lex M Bouter; Henrica Cw de Vet; Bert Aertgeerts Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2010-02-17
Authors: Brian F Degenhardt; Nissar A Darmani; Jane C Johnson; Lex C Towns; Diana C J Rhodes; Chung Trinh; Bryan McClanahan; Vincenzo DiMarzo Journal: J Am Osteopath Assoc Date: 2007-09
Authors: Weronika Grabowska; Wren Burton; Matthew H Kowalski; Robert Vining; Cynthia R Long; Anthony Lisi; Jeffrey M Hausdorff; Brad Manor; Dennis Muñoz-Vergara; Peter M Wayne Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord Date: 2022-09-05 Impact factor: 2.562