Evidence-informed management of chronic low back pain with traction therapy

Effectiveness of Mechanical Traction for Lumbar Radiculopathy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

Lumbar radiculopathy (LR) is a pain syndrome caused by compression/irritation of the lumbar nerve root(s). Traction is a well-known and commonly used conservative treatment for LR, although its effectiveness is disputed. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials was to evaluate the effects of different types of traction added to or compared with conservative treatments on pain and disability.

METHODS

Data were obtained from CENTRAL, PUBMED, CINAHL, Scopus, ISI Web of Science, and PEDro from their inception to April 2020. All randomized controlled trials on adults with LR, using mechanical traction, and without any restriction regarding publication time or language were considered. Two reviewers selected the studies, evaluated the quality assessment, and extracted the results. Meta-analysis used a random-effects model. Eight studies met the inclusion criteria, and 5 were meta-analyzed.

RESULTS

Meta-analyses of results from low-quality studies indicated that supine mechanical traction added to physical therapist treatments had significant effects on pain (g = -0.58 [95% confidence interval = -0.87 to -0.29]) and disability (g = -0.78 [95% confidence interval = -1.45 to -0.11]). Analyses of results from high-quality studies of prone mechanical traction added to physical therapist intervention for pain and disability were not significant. These results were also evident at short-term follow-up (up to 3 months after intervention).

CONCLUSION

The literature suggests that, for pain and disability in LR, there is short-term effectiveness of supine mechanical traction when added to physical therapist intervention.

IMPACT

This systematic review may be relevant for clinical practice due to its external validity because the treatments and the outcome measures are very similar to those commonly used in a clinical context.

The Real Time Geometric Effect of a Lordotic Curve-Controlled Spinal Traction Device: A Randomized Cross Over Study

Background: A standard spinal traction (ST) device was designed to straighten the spine without considering physiological lumbar lordosis. Using lordotic curve-controlled traction (LCCT), which maintains the lordotic curve during traction, the traction force would be applied to the posterior spinal structure effectively. Thus, the purpose of our study was to evaluate real-time biomechanical changes while applying the LCCT and ST. Methods: In this study, 40 subjects with mild non-radicular low back pain (LBP) were included. The participants underwent LCCT and ST in random order. Anterior and posterior intervertebral distance, ratios of anterior/posterior intervertebral distance (A/P ratio), and lordotic angles of intervertebral bodies (L2~L5) were measured by radiography. Results: Mean intervertebral distances were greater during LCCT than those measured prior to applying traction (p < 0.05). Mean A/P ratio was also significantly greater during LCCT than during ST or initially (p < 0.05). In particular, for the L4/5 intervertebral segment, which is responsible for most of the lordotic curve, mean LCCT angle was similar to mean lordotic angle in the standing position (10.9°). Conclusions: Based on measurements of radiologic geometrical changes with real-time clinical setting, the newly developed LCCT appears to be a useful traction device for increasing intervertebral disc spaces by maintaining lordotic curves.

Therapeutic ultrasound for chronic low back pain

BACKGROUND

This is an update of a Cochrane Review published in 2014. Chronic non-specific low back pain (LBP) has become one of the main causes of disability in the adult population around the world. Although therapeutic ultrasound is not recommended in recent clinical guidelines, it is frequently used by physiotherapists in the treatment of chronic LBP.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this review was to determine the effectiveness of therapeutic ultrasound in the management of chronic non-specific LBP. A secondary objective was to determine the most effective dosage and intensity of therapeutic ultrasound for chronic LBP.

SEARCH METHODS

We performed electronic searches in CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PEDro, Index to Chiropractic Literature, and two trials registers to 7 January 2020. We checked the reference lists of eligible studies and relevant systematic reviews and performed forward citation searching.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on therapeutic ultrasound for chronic non-specific LBP. We compared ultrasound (either alone or in combination with another treatment) with placebo or other interventions for chronic LBP.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed the risk of bias of each trial and extracted the data. We performed a meta-analysis when sufficient clinical and statistical homogeneity existed. We determined the certainty of the evidence for each comparison using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 10 RCTs involving a total of 1025 participants with chronic LBP. The included studies were carried out in secondary care settings in Turkey, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Croatia, the UK, and the USA, and most applied therapeutic ultrasound in addition to another treatment, for six to 18 treatment sessions. The risk of bias was unclear in most studies. Eight studies (80%) had unclear or high risk of selection bias; no studies blinded care providers to the intervention; and only five studies (50%) blinded participants. There was a risk of selective reporting in eight studies (80%), and no studies adequately assessed compliance with the intervention. There was very low-certainty evidence (downgraded for imprecision, inconsistency, and limitations in design) of little to no difference between therapeutic ultrasound and placebo for short-term pain improvement (mean difference (MD) -7.12, 95% confidence interval (CI) -17.99 to 3.75; n = 121, 3 RCTs; 0-to-100-point visual analogue scale (VAS)). There was also moderate-certainty evidence (downgraded for imprecision) of little to no difference in the number of participants achieving a 30% reduction in pain in the short term (risk ratio 1.08, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.44; n = 225, 1 RCT). There was low-certainty evidence (downgraded for imprecision and limitations in design) that therapeutic ultrasound has a small effect on back-specific function compared with placebo in the short term (standardised mean difference -0.29, 95% CI -0.51 to -0.07 (MD -1.07, 95% CI -1.89 to -0.26; Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire); n = 325; 4 RCTs), but this effect does not appear to be clinically important. There was moderate-certainty evidence (downgraded for imprecision) of little to no difference between therapeutic ultrasound and placebo on well-being (MD -2.71, 95% CI -9.85 to 4.44; n = 267, 2 RCTs; general health subscale of the 36-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36)). Two studies (n = 486) reported on overall improvement and satisfaction between groups, and both reported little to no difference between groups (low-certainty evidence, downgraded for serious imprecision). One study (n = 225) reported on adverse events and did not identify any adverse events related to the intervention (low-certainty evidence, downgraded for serious imprecision). No study reported on disability for this comparison. We do not know whether therapeutic ultrasound in addition to exercise results in better outcomes than exercise alone because the certainty of the evidence for all outcomes was very low (downgraded for imprecision and serious limitations in design). The estimate effect for pain was in favour of the ultrasound plus exercise group (MD -21.1, 95% CI -27.6 to -14.5; n = 70, 2 RCTs; 0-to-100-point VAS) at short term. Regarding back-specific function (MD - 0.41, 95% CI -3.14 to 2.32; n = 79, 2 RCTs; Oswestry Disability Questionnaire) and well-being (MD -2.50, 95% CI -9.53 to 4.53; n = 79, 2 RCTs; general health subscale of the SF-36), there was little to no difference between groups at short term. No studies reported on the number of participants achieving a 30% reduction in pain, patient satisfaction, disability, or adverse events for this comparison.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence from this systematic review is uncertain regarding the effect of therapeutic ultrasound on pain in individuals with chronic non-specific LBP. Whilst there is some evidence that therapeutic ultrasound may have a small effect on improving low back function in the short term compared to placebo, the certainty of evidence is very low. The true effect is likely to be substantially different. There are few high-quality randomised trials, and the available trials were very small. The current evidence does not support the use of therapeutic ultrasound in the management of chronic LBP.

Comparisons of the Effectiveness and Safety of Tuina, Acupuncture, Traction, and Chinese Herbs for Lumbar Disc Herniation: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Tuina, acupuncture, traction, and Chinese herbs play an important role in the treatment of lumbar disc herniation. However, the comparative effectiveness and safety of the four commonly utilized treatment modalities are still unclear.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effectiveness and safety of the four interventions for lumbar disc herniation.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials comparing any two of the four interventions in the treatment of lumbar disc herniation were identified using the following databases: PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science, the China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Chinese Science and Technology Periodical Database, and Wanfang data, and network meta-analysis was performed using STATA 14.0.

RESULTS

One hundred and twenty-one studies involving a total of 13075 patients were included. In all the outcome measurements, traction demonstrated a worst effectiveness, and Tuina and acupuncture demonstrated a best effectiveness, but no significant differences were found between Tuina and acupuncture. Compared with Tuina or acupuncture, Chinese herbs showed a similar effectiveness in Visual Analogue Score and Japanese Orthopedic Association Scores, but an inferior effectiveness in invalid rate and cure rate.

CONCLUSIONS

In the treatment of lumbar disc herniation, Tuina and acupuncture were superior to traction or Chinese herbs, and the effectiveness of traction was the worst. However, considering the limitations of this review, more high-quality trials, especially those comparing Chinese herbs with the other three interventions, should be carried out in the future to further confirm the current findings.

Effect of the In Vitro Boundary Conditions on the Surface Strain Experienced by the Vertebral Body in the Elastic Regime

The vertebral strength and strain can be assessed in vitro by both using isolated vertebrae and sets of three adjacent vertebrae (the central one is loaded through the disks). Our goal was to elucidate if testing single-vertebra-specimens in the elastic regime provides different surface strains to three-vertebrae-segments. Twelve three-vertebrae sets were extracted from thoracolumbar human spines. To measure the principal strains, the central vertebra of each segment was prepared with eight strain-gauges. The sets were tested mechanically, allowing comparison of the surface strains between the two boundary conditions: first when the same vertebra was loaded through the disks (three-vertebrae-segment) and then with the endplates embedded in cement (single-vertebra). They were all subjected to four nondestructive tests (compression, traction, torsion clockwise, and counterclockwise). The magnitude of principal strains differed significantly between the two boundary conditions. For axial loading, the largest principal strains (along vertebral axis) were significantly higher when the same vertebra was tested isolated compared to the three-vertebrae-segment. Conversely, circumferential strains decreased significantly in the single vertebrae compared to the three-vertebrae-segment, with some variations exceeding 100% of the strain magnitude, including changes from tension to compression. For torsion, the differences between boundary conditions were smaller. This study shows that, in the elastic regime, when the vertebra is loaded through a cement pot, the surface strains differ from when it is loaded through the disks. Therefore, when single vertebrae are tested, surface strain should be taken with caution.

Comparison of the short-term effects of the conventional motorized traction with non-surgical spinal decompression performed with a DRX9000 device on pain, functionality, depression, and quality of life in patients with low back pain associated with lumbar disc herniation: A single-blind randomized-controlled trial

Objectives

This study aims to compare the efficiency of conventional motorized traction (CMT) with non-surgical spinal decompression (NSD) using the DRX9000™ device in patients with low back pain associated with lumbar disc herniation (LDH).

Patients and methods

Between March 2009 and September 2009, a total of 48 patients (29 females, 19 males; mean age 43.1±9.8 years; range, 18 to 65 years) were randomized into two groups. The first group (n=24) underwent CMT and the second group (n=24) underwent NSD for a total of 20 sessions over six weeks. The patients were evaluated before and after the treatment. Pain was assessed using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), functional status using the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), quality of life using the Short Form-36 (SF-36), state of depression mood using the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), and the global assessment of the illness using the Patient's Global Assessment of Response to Therapy (PGART) and Investigator's Global Assessment of Response to Therapy (IGART) scales.

Results

There was no significant difference in the evaluation outcomes before the treatment between the groups. However, a statistically significant decline was found in the VAS, ODI, and BDI scores after the treatment in both groups (all p<0.001). Except for two subgroups, no significant changes were observed in the SF-36 form. Assessment of "marked improvement" was globally most frequently reported one in both groups. No significant difference was observed in the evaluation outcomes after treatment between the groups.

Conclusion

Our study results show that both CMT and NSD are effective methods in pain management and functional status and depressive mood improvement in patients with LDH, and NSD is not superior to CMT in terms of pain, functionality, depression and quality of life.

The Effectiveness of Mechanical Traction Among Subgroups of Patients With Low Back Pain and Leg Pain: A Randomized Trial

STUDY DESIGN

Randomized clinical trial. Background The recommended initial management strategy for patients with low back pain and signs of nerve root compression is conservative treatment, but there is little evidence to guide the most appropriate management strategy. Preliminary research suggests that a treatment protocol of mechanical traction and extension-oriented exercises may be effective, particularly in a specific subgroup of patients.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the effectiveness of mechanical traction in patients with lumbar nerve root compression and within a predefined subgroup.

METHODS

One hundred twenty patients with low back pain with nerve root compression were recruited from physical therapy clinics. Using predefined subgrouping criteria, patients were stratified at baseline and randomized to receive an extension-oriented treatment approach with or without the addition of mechanical traction. During a 6-week period, patients received up to 12 treatment visits. Primary outcomes of pain and disability were collected at 6 weeks, 6 months, and 1 year by assessors blinded to group allocation. Outcomes were examined using linear mixed-model analyses examining change over time by treatment and the interaction between treatment and subgrouping status.

RESULTS

The mean ± SD age of participants was 41.1 ± 11.3 years, median duration of symptoms was 62 days, and 57% were male. No significant differences in disability or pain outcomes were noted between treatment groups at any time point, nor was any interaction found between subgroup status and treatment.

CONCLUSION

Patients with lumbar nerve root compression presenting for physical therapy can expect significant changes in disability and pain over a 6-week treatment period. There is no evidence that mechanical lumbar traction in combination with an extension-oriented treatment is superior to extension-oriented exercises alone in the management of these patients or within a predefined subgroup of patients. The study protocol was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00942227). Level of Evidence Therapy, level 2b.

Effect of combining traction and vibration on back muscles, heart rate and blood pressure

Eighty-five percent of the population has experienced low back pain (LBP), which may result in decreasing muscle strength and endurance, functional capacity of the spine, and so on. Traction and vibration are commonly used to relieve the low back pain. The effect of the combing traction and vibration on back muscles, heart rate (HR) and blood pressure (BP) was investigated in this study. Thirty healthy subjects participated in 12 trials lying supine on the spine-combing bed with different tilt angle (0°, 10°, 20° and 30°) and vibration modes (along with the sagittal and coronal axis with 0 Hz, 2 Hz and 12 Hz separately). EMG was recorded during each trial. Power spectral frequency analysis was applied to evaluate muscle fatigue by the shift of median power frequency (MPF). Pulse pressure (PP) was calculated from BP. HR and PP were used to estimate the effect of the combination of traction and vibration on the cardio-vascular system. It was shown that vibration could increase HR and decrease PP. The combination of traction and vibration (2 Hz vibration along Z-axis and 12 Hz vibration along Y-axis) had no significant effect on the cardio-vascular system. The MPF of lumbar erector spinae (LES) and upper trapezius (UT) decreased significantly when the angle reached 20° under the condition of 2 Hz vibration along Z-axis compared with it of 0°. Furthermore, the MPF also decreased significantly compared with it of static mode at 20° for LES and at 30° for UT. However at 12 Hz vibration along Y-axis, the MPF had significant increase when the angle reached 20° in LES and 30° in UT compared to 0°. For LES, the MPF also had significant difference when the angle was increased from 10° to 20°. Therefore, combining 2 Hz vibration along Z-axis and traction (tilt angles that less than 20°) may to reduce muscle fatigue both for LES and UT compared with either vibration or traction alone. The combination of 12 Hz vibration along Y-axis and traction (tilt angles greater than 10° for LES and more than 20° for UT) could provide good treatment of lower muscle fatigue for back pain compared with either vibration or traction alone. It is helpful to provide biomechanical quantitative basis for the selection of the clinical treatment methods.

Therapeutic ultrasound for chronic low-back pain

BACKGROUND

Chronic non-specific low-back pain (LBP) has become one of the main causes of disability in the adult population around the world. Therapeutic ultrasound is frequently used by physiotherapists in the treatment of LBP and is one of the most widely used electro-physical agents in clinical practice.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this review is to determine the effectiveness of therapeutic ultrasound in the management of chronic non-specific LBP.

SEARCH METHODS

Electronic searches were performed using CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PEDro, and PsycLIT databases in October 2013. Reference lists of eligible studies and relevant systematic reviews were checked and forward citation searching was also performed.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials on therapeutic ultrasound for non-specific chronic LBP were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed the risk of bias of each trial and extracted the data. When sufficient clinical and statistical homogeneity existed, a meta-analysis was performed. The quality of the evidence for each comparison was determined using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

Seven small randomised controlled trials involving a total of 362 participants with chronic LBP were included. Two of the studies had a low risk of bias, meeting six or more of the 12 criteria used for assessing risk of bias. All studies were carried out in secondary care settings and most applied therapeutic ultrasound in addition to exercise therapy, at various intensities for six to 18 treatment sessions. There was moderate quality evidence that therapeutic ultrasound improves back-specific function (standardised mean difference (SMD) [95%CI] -0.45 [-0.84 to -0.05]) compared with placebo in the short term. There was low quality evidence that therapeutic ultrasound is no better than placebo for short-term pain improvement (mean difference (MD) [95%CI] -7.12 [-17.99 to 3.75]; zero to100-point scale). There was low quality evidence that therapeutic ultrasound plus exercise is no better than exercise alone for short-term pain improvement (MD [95%CI] -2.16 [-4.66 to 0.34]; zero to 50-point scale), or functional disability (MD [95%CI] -0.41 [-3.14 to 2.32]; per cent). The studies comparing therapeutic ultrasound versus placebo or versus exercise alone did not report on overall satisfaction with treatment, or quality of life. There was low quality evidence that spinal manipulation reduces pain and functional disability more than ultrasound over the short to medium term. There is also very low quality evidence that there is no clear benefit on any outcome measure between electrical stimulation and therapeutic ultrasound; and that phonophoresis results in improved SF-36 scores compared to therapeutic ultrasound. None of the included studies reported on adverse events related to the application of therapeutic ultrasound.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

No high quality evidence was found to support the use of ultrasound for improving pain or quality of life in patients with non-specific chronic LBP. There is some evidence that therapeutic ultrasound has a small effect on improving low-back function in the short term, but this benefit is unlikely to be clinically important. Evidence from comparisons between other treatments and therapeutic ultrasound for chronic LBP were indeterminate and generally of low quality. Since there are few high quality randomised trials and the available trials are very small, future large trials with valid methodology are likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate.

Traction for low-back pain with or without sciatica

BACKGROUND

Traction has been used to treat low-back pain (LBP), often in combination with other treatments. We included both manual and machine-delivered traction in this review. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 1995, and previously updated in 2006.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of traction compared to placebo, sham traction, reference treatments and no treatment in people with LBP.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Back Review Group Specialized Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (2012, Issue 8), MEDLINE (January 2006 to August 2012), EMBASE (January 2006 to August 2012), CINAHL (January 2006 to August 2012), and reference lists of articles and personal files. The review authors are not aware of any important new randomized controlled trial (RCTs) on this topic since the date of the last search.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs involving traction to treat acute (less than four weeks' duration), subacute (four to 12 weeks' duration) or chronic (more than 12 weeks' duration) non-specific LBP with or without sciatica.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently performed study selection, risk of bias assessment and data extraction. As there were insufficient data for statistical pooling, we performed a descriptive analysis. We did not find any case series that identified adverse effects, therefore we evaluated adverse effects that were reported in the included studies.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 32 RCTs involving 2762 participants in this review. We considered 16 trials, representing 57% of all participants, to have a low risk of bias based on the Cochrane Back Review Group's 'Risk of bias' tool.For people with mixed symptom patterns (acute, subacute and chronic LBP with and without sciatica), there was low- to moderate-quality evidence that traction may make little or no difference in pain intensity, functional status, global improvement or return to work when compared to placebo, sham traction or no treatment. Similarly, when comparing the combination of physiotherapy plus traction with physiotherapy alone or when comparing traction with other treatments, there was very-low- to moderate-quality evidence that traction may make little or no difference in pain intensity, functional status or global improvement.For people with LBP with sciatica and acute, subacute or chronic pain, there was low- to moderate-quality evidence that traction probably has no impact on pain intensity, functional status or global improvement. This was true when traction was compared with controls and other treatments, as well as when the combination of traction plus physiotherapy was compared with physiotherapy alone. No studies reported the effect of traction on return to work.For chronic LBP without sciatica, there was moderate-quality evidence that traction probably makes little or no difference in pain intensity when compared with sham treatment. No studies reported on the effect of traction on functional status, global improvement or return to work.Adverse effects were reported in seven of the 32 studies. These included increased pain, aggravation of neurological signs and subsequent surgery. Four studies reported that there were no adverse effects. The remaining studies did not mention adverse effects.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

These findings indicate that traction, either alone or in combination with other treatments, has little or no impact on pain intensity, functional status, global improvement and return to work among people with LBP. There is only limited-quality evidence from studies with small sample sizes and moderate to high risk of bias. The effects shown by these studies are small and are not clinically relevant. Implications for practice To date, the use of traction as treatment for non-specific LBP cannot be motivated by the best available evidence. These conclusions are applicable to both manual and mechanical traction. Implications for research Only new, large, high-quality studies may change the point estimate and its accuracy, but it should be noted that such change may not necessarily favour traction. Therefore, little priority should be given to new studies on the effect of traction treatment alone or as part of a package.

Massage therapy for cervical degenerative disc disease: alleviating a pain in the neck?

Background:

A 66-year-old female client with cervical degenerative disc disease at lateral left facet joint C6/C7 was experiencing symptoms of chronic neck pain accompanied by limited cervical range of motion, as well as radicular left shoulder and arm pain. The objective of this case report was to describe the effect of therapeutic massage on the client’s symptoms and impairments of cervical DDD.

Methods:

Therapeutic massage interventions included soft-tissue manipulation using petrissage and neuromuscular techniques, fascial work, facilitated stretching, joint play, hydrotherapy, education on self-stretching, and positive guidance about condition management. Assessment included pain-free cervical ROM and a subjective verbal pain scale.

Results:

After several treatment sessions, client’s symptoms had decreased and cervical ROM had improved moderately. There was also a decrease in reported pain and an increase in functional daily activities. Client showed a greater understanding of the physiologic barriers which degenerative changes may present.

Conclusions:

This client responded favorably to massage therapy as a treatment intervention for cervical DDD symptoms.

The young adult spine in sports

In summary, LBP is a common problem for the young adult athlete, with discogenic pain being the most common of all etiologies. Although rare, more serious etiologies such as tumor or infection should be included in the differential diagnosis until effectively ruled out. Regardless of the cause, nonoperative and conservative strategies should be the cornerstone of treatment, owing to the favorable natural history of most LBP etiologies. Short-term non-narcotic medications are helpful, and avoidance of bed rest is critical for the athletic population. Rehabilitation should focus on stabilization and strengthening of the core and pelvic muscle groups, and biomechanical imbalances should be addressed. Surgical intervention ought to be utilized as a last resort in this population. Return to play should be considered only when the athlete is pain free with full range of motion and daily medications have been discontinued. Careful monitoring of the training regimen should always be undertaken,especially with chronic pain or recurrent injuries.

The effect of continuous ultrasound on chronic low back pain: protocol of a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Chronic non-specific low-back pain (LBP) is one of the most common and expensive musculoskeletal disorders in industrialized countries. Similar to other countries in the world, LBP is a common health and socioeconomic problem in Iran. One of the most widely used modalities in the field of physiotherapy for treating LBP is therapeutic ultrasound. Despite its common use, there is still inconclusive evidence to support its effectiveness in this group of patients. This randomised trial will evaluate the effectiveness of continuous ultrasound in addition to exercise therapy in patients with chronic LBP.

METHODS AND DESIGN

A total of 46 patients, between the ages 18 and 65 years old who have had LBP for more than three months will be recruited from university hospitals. Participants will be randomized to receive continuous ultrasound plus exercise therapy or placebo ultrasound plus exercise therapy. These groups will be treated for 10 sessions during a period of 4 weeks. Primary outcome measures will be functional disability and pain intensity. Lumbar flexion and extension range of motion, as well as changes in electromyography muscle fatigue indices, will be measured as secondary outcomes. All outcome measures will be measured at baseline, after completion of the treatment sessions, and after one month.

DISCUSSION

The results of this trial will help to provide some evidence regarding the use of continuous ultrasound in chronic LBP patients. This should lead to a more evidence-based approach to clinical decision making regarding the use of ultrasound for LBP.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Netherlands Trial Register (NTR): NTR2251.

A randomized clinical trial of the effectiveness of mechanical traction for sub-groups of patients with low back pain: study methods and rationale

Background

Patients with signs of nerve root irritation represent a sub-group of those with low back pain who are at increased risk of persistent symptoms and progression to costly and invasive management strategies including surgery. A period of non-surgical management is recommended for most patients, but there is little evidence to guide non-surgical decision-making. We conducted a preliminary study examining the effectiveness of a treatment protocol of mechanical traction with extension-oriented activities for patients with low back pain and signs of nerve root irritation. The results suggested this approach may be effective, particularly in a more specific sub-group of patients. The aim of this study will be to examine the effectiveness of treatment that includes traction for patients with low back pain and signs of nerve root irritation, and within the pre-defined sub-group.

Methods/Design

The study will recruit 120 patients with low back pain and signs of nerve root irritation. Patients will be randomized to receive an extension-oriented treatment approach, with or without the addition of mechanical traction. Randomization will be stratified based on the presence of the pre-defined sub-grouping criteria. All patients will receive 12 physical therapy treatment sessions over 6 weeks. Follow-up assessments will occur after 6 weeks, 6 months, and 1 year. The primary outcome will be disability measured with a modified Oswestry questionnaire. Secondary outcomes will include self-reports of low back and leg pain intensity, quality of life, global rating of improvement, additional healthcare utilization, and work absence. Statistical analysis will be based on intention to treat principles and will use linear mixed model analysis to compare treatment groups, and examine the interaction between treatment and sub-grouping status.

Discussion

This trial will provide a methodologically rigorous evaluation of the effectiveness of using traction for patients with low back pain and signs of nerve root irritation, and will examine the validity of a pre-defined sub-grouping hypothesis. The results will provide evidence to inform non-surgical decision-making for these patients.

Trial Registration

This trial has been registered with http://ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00942227

Chiropractic management of a 47-year-old firefighter with lumbar disk extrusion

OBJECTIVE

This case report describes the effect of exercise-based chiropractic treatment on chronic and intractable low back pain complicated by lumbar disk extrusion.

CLINICAL FEATURES

A 47-year-old male firefighter experienced chronic, unresponsive low back pain. Pre- and posttreatment outcome analysis was performed on numeric (0-10) pain scale, functional rating index, and the low back pain Oswestry data. Secondary outcome assessments included a 1-rep maximum leg press, balancing times, push-ups and sit-ups the patient performed in 60 seconds, and radiographic analysis.

INTERVENTION AND OUTCOME

The patient was treated with Pettibon manipulative and rehabilitative techniques. At 4 weeks, spinal decompression therapy was incorporated. After 12 weeks of treatment, the patient's self-reported numeric pain scale had reduced from 6 to 1. There was also overall improvement in muscular strength, balance times, self-rated functional status, low back Oswestry scores, and lumbar lordosis using pre- and posttreatment radiographic information.

CONCLUSION

Comprehensive, exercise-based chiropractic management may contribute to an improvement of physical fitness and to restoration of function, and may be a protective factor for low back injury. This case suggests promising interventions with otherwise intractable low back pain using a multimodal chiropractic approach that includes isometric strengthening, neuromuscular reeducation, and lumbar spinal decompression therapy.

No effect of traction in patients with low back pain: a single centre, single blind, randomized controlled trial of Intervertebral Differential Dynamics Therapy

Low back pain (LBP) poses a significant problem to society. Although initial conservative therapy may be beneficial, persisting chronic LBP still frequently leads to expensive invasive intervention. A novel non-invasive therapy that focuses on discogenic LBP is Intervertebral Differential Dynamics Therapy (IDD Therapy, North American Medical Corp. Reg U.S.). IDD Therapy consists of intermittent traction sessions in the Accu-SPINA device (Steadfast Corporation Ltd, Essex, UK), an FDA approved, class II medical device. The intervertebral disc and facet joints are unloaded through axial distraction, positioning and relaxation cycles. The purpose of this study is to investigate the effect of IDD Therapy when added to a standard graded activity program for chronic LBP patients. In a single blind, single centre, randomized controlled trial; 60 consecutive patients were assigned to either the SHAM or the IDD Therapy. All subjects received the standard conservative therapeutic care (graded activity) and 20 sessions in the Accu-SPINA device. The traction weight in the IDD Therapy was systematically increased until 50% of a person's body weight plus 4.45 kg (10 lb) was reached. The SHAM group received a non-therapeutic traction weight of 4.45 kg in all sessions. The main outcome was assessed using a 100-mm visual analogue scale (VAS) for LBP. Secondary outcomes were VAS scores for leg pain, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Short-Form 36 (SF-36). All parameters were measured before and 2, 6 and 14 weeks after start of the treatment. Fear of (re)injury due to movement or activities (Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia), coping strategies (Utrecht Coping List) and use of pain medication were recorded before and at 14 weeks. A repeated measures analysis was performed. The two groups were comparable at baseline in terms of demographic, clinical and psychological characteristics, indicating that the random allocation had succeeded. VAS low back pain improved significantly from 61 (+/-25) to 32 (+/-27) with the IDD protocol and 53 (+/-26) to 36 (+/-27) in the SHAM protocol. Moreover, leg pain, ODI and SF-36 scores improved significantly but in both groups. The use of pain medication decreased significantly, whereas scores for kinesiophobia and coping remained at the same non-pathological level. None of the parameters showed a difference between both protocols. Both treatment regimes had a significant beneficial effect on LBP, leg pain, functional status and quality of life after 14 weeks. The added axial, intermittent, mechanical traction of IDD Therapy to a standard graded activity program has been shown not to be effective.