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

Manual therapy provided by physical therapists in a hospital-based setting: a retrospective analysis

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes, complications, and hospital disposition in a cohort of patients hospitalized for low back pain who receive physical therapist (PT)-administered manual therapy (mobilization and manipulation) vs those who do not receive manual therapy.

METHODS

The study was a retrospective data collection that used the Nationwide Inpatient Sample. Seventy-five patients hospitalized with low back pain who receive PT-administered manual therapy were matched using specific covariates with patients with low back who did not receive manual therapy. Bivariate analyses and regression modeling were used to determine comparisons between the 2 groups.

RESULTS

Findings indicated that patients who received PT manual therapy had significantly longer lengths of hospital stay (P < .01) and had significantly higher inflation-adjusted costs of care (P < .01). After regression modeling and adjustments for covariates, findings for length of stay were still higher in the PT manual therapy group (P < .01), but costs were significantly lower for this group (P < .01). There were minimal findings of complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Of 106 340 patients admitted for low back pain originally queried, only 75 patients (0.07%) received manual therapy, a markedly small number of patients. Outcomes may be reflective of the low effect size of manual therapy in a hospital setting or the inability to control for referral and hospital care patterns, thus disallowing appropriate matching.

Neuromuscular consequences of low back pain and core dysfunction

Recurring episodes of low back pain present a dilemma for patients and clinicians. Patients who experience disability caused by repeated low back pain episodes are limited in their activities of daily living and may experience inappropriate neuromuscular adaptations to maintain and/or preserve function. Unfortunately, it is likely that these changes create an environment where lower extremity and spine joints are exposed to unusual and possibly excessive forces while attenuating impact from walking, running, or other activities. Individuals who want to maintain a healthy lifestyle may be restricted because of recurring and disabling nonspecific low back pain. Individuals who must continue with normal and necessary activities of daily living may choose an adaptive mechanism to preserve functional gait. Some individuals may use an adaptive strategy that is unfavorable, possibly exposing muscles and joints to further injury or long-term degenerative processes.

Chronic non-specific low back pain - sub-groups or a single mechanism?

BACKGROUND

Low back pain is a substantial health problem and has subsequently attracted a considerable amount of research. Clinical trials evaluating the efficacy of a variety of interventions for chronic non-specific low back pain indicate limited effectiveness for most commonly applied interventions and approaches.

DISCUSSION

Many clinicians challenge the results of clinical trials as they feel that this lack of effectiveness is at odds with their clinical experience of managing patients with back pain. A common explanation for this discrepancy is the perceived heterogeneity of patients with chronic non-specific low back pain. It is felt that the effects of treatment may be diluted by the application of a single intervention to a complex, heterogeneous group with diverse treatment needs. This argument presupposes that current treatment is effective when applied to the correct patient. An alternative perspective is that the clinical trials are correct and current treatments have limited efficacy. Preoccupation with sub-grouping may stifle engagement with this view and it is important that the sub-grouping paradigm is closely examined. This paper argues that there are numerous problems with the sub-grouping approach and that it may not be an important reason for the disappointing results of clinical trials. We propose instead that current treatment may be ineffective because it has been misdirected. Recent evidence that demonstrates changes within the brain in chronic low back pain sufferers raises the possibility that persistent back pain may be a problem of cortical reorganisation and degeneration. This perspective offers interesting insights into the chronic low back pain experience and suggests alternative models of intervention.

SUMMARY

The disappointing results of clinical research are commonly explained by the failure of researchers to adequately attend to sub-grouping of the chronic non-specific low back pain population. Alternatively, current approaches may be ineffective and clinicians and researchers may need to radically rethink the nature of the problem and how it should best be managed.