Short-term response of hip mobilizations and exercise in individuals with chronic low back pain: a case series

Hip-Spine Syndrome in the Nonarthritic Patient

Hip-spine syndrome refers to concurrent hip and spine pathology with overlapping symptoms. Most of the literature has studied it in relation to total hip arthroplasty literature and has been shown to increase dislocation risk. Lumbar spine and pelvic mobility have been studied less frequently in relation to nonarthritic pathologic hip states. Understanding the biomechanical relationship between the lumbar spine, pelvis, and hip can help elucidate how hip-spine syndrome affects the nonarthritic hip and how it impacts outcomes of hip arthroscopy. Changes in lumbar spine motion may be the reason certain predisposed patients develop symptomatic femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) or ischiofemoral impingement. Some athletes may be "hip users" with a low pelvic incidence, making them more reliant on hip motion due to less-intrinsic lumbopelvic motion. When these patients have FAI morphology, their increased reliance on hip motion makes them prone to experiencing femoroacetabular contact and concurrent symptoms. Other athletes may be "spine users," with larger pelvic incidence and more baseline lumbopelvic motion, making them less reliant on hip motion and therefore less prone to experiencing hip impingement even with hip FAI morphology. Hip-spine syndrome also appears to have an impact on patient selection, role of nonoperative treatment, and hip arthroscopy surgical outcomes. Identifying patients with concurrent pathology may allow surgeons to recommend targeted physical therapy or counsel patients better on their expectations after surgery.

EFFECT OF THE MAITLAND CONCEPT TECHNIQUES ON LOW BACK PAIN: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW

ABSTRACT Low back pain has a prevalence that reaches up to 70% of the population between 35-55 years of age and is the principal cause of occupational disability. The scientific evidence on the effect of manual therapy on low back pain is conflicting and there are no specific reviews on the Maitland concept of manual therapy. Therefore, the objective of this systematic review is to analyze the effect of the techniques of the Maitland concept of manual therapy in patients with low back pain and/or determine the level of scientific evidence.For this, a search was carried out in the Cinahl, Medline, Web of Science, PubMed and Scopus databases during the months of January and February 2021 and it was updated in August 2021. In the search, 894 records were obtained, of which 15 randomized clinical trials that obtained a minimum of 3 points out of 5 on the Jadad scale were included.The main results in the current scientific literature suggest that there is solid evidence that the manipulations and mobilizations described in the Maitland Concept, applied alone or in combination with other interventions, reduce pain and disability in subjects with low back pain.The effects on musculature are contradictory. Exercise and patient education increase the effect of manual therapy. Future research requires analyzing whether the effects are preserved in the long term and more homogeneous treatment protocols are needed to determine a prescriptive guideline for manual therapy. Level of evidence I; Systematic review.

When Treating Coexisting Low Back Pain and Hip Impairments, Focus on the Back: Adding Specific Hip Treatment Does Not Yield Additional Benefits-A Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether adding hip treatment to usual care for low back pain (LBP) improved disability and pain in individuals with LBP and a concurrent hip impairment.

DESIGN

Randomized controlled trial.

METHODS

Seventy-six participants (age, 18 years or older; Oswestry Disability Index, 20% or greater; numeric pain-rating scale, 2 or more points) with LBP and a concurrent hip impairment were randomly assigned to a group that received treatment to the lumbar spine only (LBO group) (n = 39) or to one that received both lumbar spine and hip treatments (LBH group) (n = 37). The individual treating clinicians decided which specific low back treatments to administer to the LBO group. Treatments aimed at the hip (LBH group) included manual therapy, exercise, and education, selected by the therapist from a predetermined set of treatments. Primary outcomes were disability and pain, measured by the Oswestry Disability Index and the numeric pain-rating scale, respectively, at baseline, 2 weeks, discharge, 6 months, and 12 months. The secondary outcomes were fear-avoidance beliefs (work and physical activity subscales of the Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire), global rating of change, the Patient Acceptable Symptom State, and physical activity level. We used mixed-model 2-by-3 analyses of variance to examine group-by-time interaction effects (intention-to-treat analysis).

RESULTS

Data were available for 68 patients at discharge (LBH group, n = 33; LBO group, n = 35) and 48 at 12 months (n = 24 for both groups). There were no between-group differences in disability at discharge (-5.0; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -10.9, 0.89; P = .09), 12 months (-1.0; 95% CI: -4.44, 2.35; P = .54), and all other time points. There were no between-group differences in pain at discharge (-0.2; 95% CI: -1.03, 0.53; P = .53), 12 months (0.1; 95% CI: -0.53, 0.72; P = .76), and all other time points. There were no between-group differences in secondary outcomes, except for higher Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire (work subscale) scores in the LBH group at 2 weeks (-3.35; 95% CI: -6.58, -0.11; P = .04) and discharge (-3.45; 95% CI: - 6.30, -0.61; P = .02).

CONCLUSION

Adding treatments aimed at the hip to usual low back physical therapy did not provide additional short- or long-term benefits in reducing disability and pain in individuals with LBP and a concurrent hip impairment. Clinicians may not need to include hip treatments to achieve reductions in low back disability and pain in individuals with LBP and a concurrent hip impairment. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2021;51(12):581-601. Epub 16 Nov 2021. 2021. doi:10.2519/jospt.2021.10593.

Is there an association between hip range of motion and nonspecific low back pain? A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review whether there is an association between hip range of motion (ROM) and nonspecific low back pain (NSLBP).

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane library, PsychINFO, CINAHL and AMED databases were searched from year of inception until October 31st, 2018, using a combination of LBP and hip joint search terms. Commonly cited journals were also hand searched within the previous two years.

STUDY SELECTION

Two reviewers independently screened identified articles, by title and abstract and then by full-text. After first round screening of 2908 identified records, 248 progressed to full-text screening. Due to the heterogeneity of studies identified, post hoc inclusion criteria of English language, studies comparing subjects with NSLBP and healthy controls, cross-sectional design, and clinical measures of hip ROM were applied. Twenty-four records were finally included.

DATA EXTRACTION

Extracted data included population characteristics, duration and severity of NSLBP, hip movement direction, testing position, measurement tool and between-group difference. The Quality Assessment Tool for Observational Cohort and Cross-Sectional Studies was used to assess for study bias.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Hip flexion ROM was measured in seven studies, extension in 13, internal rotation (IR) in 14, external rotation (ER) in 13, abduction in six, and adduction in only two studies. Among all directions tested, IR ROM was reported in more studies as significantly reduced in NSLBP subjects compared to healthy individuals. Overall the quality of evidence was very low. Common sources of study bias included lack of sample size justification, blinding of outcome assessors, adjusting for key confounders, and poor reporting.

CONCLUSION

There is very low-quality evidence to support an association between limited hip ROM and NSLBP. Limited hip IR ROM was the only movement impairment found to be significantly associated with NSLBP, however this should be viewed with caution due to the low-quality supportive evidence. Further studies are needed.

Examination procedures and interventions for the hip in the management of low back pain: a survey of physical therapists

OBJECTIVES

The main research aims were to investigate whether physical therapists are examining the hip(s) in individuals with a primary complaint of low back pain (LBP) and if so, the interventions being provided that target the hip(s).

METHODS

An anonymous electronic survey was distributed to the membership of the American Physical Therapy Association Orthopaedic and Sports Sections, as well as that of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Manual Physical Therapists. Participant demographics and survey responses were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Associations between variables were examined using chi-square analysis.

RESULTS

The estimated response rate was 18.4% (n=1163, mean age 40.5±11.4 years). The majority of respondents (91%, n=1059) reported they always or most of the time examined the hip(s) in individuals with LBP. The most common examination items utilized were hip strength testing (94%, n=948), passive range of motion (91%, n=921) and muscle flexibility testing (90%, n=906). The most common interventions included hip strengthening (94%, n=866) and hip flexibility exercises (90%, n=814). Respondents enrolled in or having completed a post-professional fellowship were more likely to utilize hip joint manual therapy techniques (x²=25.3, p=<0.001) and less likely to prescribe hip flexibility exercises (x²=7.9, p=0.005) or use electrophysical modalities (x²=4.3, p=0.039).

CONCLUSIONS

Physical therapists commonly examine and provide interventions directed at the hip(s) for individuals with LBP. Post-professional fellowship training appears to influence the intervention selection of the physical therapist, with an increase in usage of hip joint manual therapy and a decrease in hip muscle flexibility and modality usage.

Effectiveness of physical therapy interventions for low back pain targeting the low back only or low back plus hips: a randomized controlled trial protocol

BACKGROUND

Recent evidence suggests that physical therapy interventions targeting the hips may improve outcomes, including pain and disability, for patients with low back pain (LBP). Currently, there is conflicting data in regard to whether an individual with LBP needs to have a concurrent hip impairment in order to respond to this approach. The purpose of this clinical trial will be to determine the short and long-term effectiveness of physical therapy interventions directed at the lumbar spine only, versus lumbar spine and hip(s), in individuals with a primary complaint of LBP with a concurrent hip impairment.

METHODS

A multi-center, randomized controlled trial of 76 adult individuals with a primary complaint of LBP, who also have at least one concurrent hip impairment. Participants will be randomized into the 'LBP only' or 'LBP+Hip' group. Treatment to the low back in both groups will be a pragmatic approach consisting of interventions targeting the low back without targeting the hip(s). Participants randomized to the LBP+Hip group will also receive a semi-prescriptive set of manual therapy and exercise techniques that target the hips. The primary outcome measures will be the modified Oswestry Disability Index and the Numeric Pain Rating Scale at discharge.

DISCUSSION

These two treatment strategies are commonly utilized in physical therapy practice, but there is uncertainty which is superior. This trial will also help to provide a better understanding of the role of concurrent hip impairments in LBP.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This trial has been prospectively registered at clinicaltrials.gov (ID# NCT03550014, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03550014) on June 7, 2018.

Variables Describing Individuals With Improved Pain and Function With a Primary Complaint of Low Back Pain: A Secondary Analysis

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to identify descriptive factors in individuals with a primary complaint of low back pain (LBP) associated with improved pain and function after receiving physical therapy for LBP with or without manual therapy and exercise directed at the femoroacetabular joints.

METHODS

Participants were enrolled in a randomized clinical trial investigating physical therapy interventions for their LBP, with or without interventions directed at the femoroacetabular joints (hips). A participant was deemed recovered if all of the following were met: Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) score of ≤2 points, ≤10% on the modified Oswestry Disability Index at discharge, and a global rating of change score of +4 at both 2 weeks and discharge. Logistic regression modelling determined descriptor variables that best predicted treatment recovery.

RESULTS

Data from 90 participants were included in the analysis, with 44% (n = 40) achieving recovery by discharge from physical therapy (average 7.95 [±4.68]) visits. The variables of concurrent hip problems, lower body mass index ≤25.4, an irritable condition, and a baseline NPRS score of 4 points or less were retained in the final model (R² = .384). Having a concurrent hip problem had the highest odds of achieving recovery in the model (odds ratio: 5.34, 95 % confidence interval: 1.31-21.8).

CONCLUSIONS

The findings for the patients in this study suggest that those with a concurrent hip problem, a lower body mass index, irritable symptoms, and a baseline NPRS score of 4 points or less were associated with greater odds of achieving recovery with multimodal physical therapy interventions. Further research should continue to investigate the interplay between the lumbar spine and hip joints.

Hip Abductor Fatigability and Recovery Are Related to the Development of Low Back Pain During Prolonged Standing

A prolonged standing exposure can identify asymptomatic adults who have a higher risk of developing clinical low back pain later in life. Hip abductor cocontraction differences can predict low back pain development during standing exposures. This study’s purpose was to determine if hip abductor strength, fatigability, and recovery during prolonged standing were related to standing-induced low back pain. Forty young, asymptomatic adults (50% female) performed two 2-hour standing sessions; a fatiguing hip abductor exercise was performed prior to 1 of the 2 standing sessions. Hip abductor strength and surface electromyography of gluteus medius and tensor fascia latae were measured. Self-reported low back pain differentiated low back pain developing (PD) and nonpain developing (NPD) groups. The PD group hip abductors fatigued before the NPD group, with similar perceived effort and force losses. Mean power frequency decreases with fatigue were similar between pain groups for all muscles measured after the fatiguing exercise. Unlike NPDs, PDs did not recover force losses after 120 minutes of standing. Hip abductor fatigability may be related to the development of low back pain in this population.

The effects of a standardized belly dance program on perceived pain, disability, and function in women with chronic low back pain

BACKGROUND

An alternative approach to facilitate movement and control through the trunk and pelvis is belly dancing. Investigations of belly dancing mechanics indicate similar muscular activation patterns of those known to influence chronic low back pain (cLBP). However, no documented studies have examined its effectiveness as a treatment for cLBP.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to investigate the influence of a standardized belly dance program in women with cLBP.

METHODS

A single subject design was used to evaluate weekly outcomes during a three-week baseline period, six-week belly dance program, and again at a two-month follow-up. Outcome measures for pain, disability, function, and fear-avoidance beliefs were utilized.

RESULTS

Two subjects completed the program. No significant differences were noted during the baseline assessment period. At two months, subject one demonstrated change scores of -1.12, -1%, and 2.2 for pain, disability, and function respectively while subject two demonstrated change scores of 5.4, 5%, and 1.1 for pain, disability, and function, respectively. Subject one showed a clinically significant change score for both fear avoidance of work and physical activity, with score changes of 4 and 3.3, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The results of this study suggest a standardized belly dance program may positively influence pain and function in women with cLBP.

Effect of Upper-Extremity Strengthening Exercises on the Lumbar Strength, Disability and Pain of Patients with Chronic Low Back Pain: A Randomized Controlled Study

The present study aimed to analyze the impacts of a low back rehabilitation program accompanied with neck, shoulder and upper back exercises on pain, disability, and physical characteristics of patients with chronic low back pain. Twenty sedentary male patients with chronic low back pain participated in the study on a voluntary basis. The patients were randomly allocated into two groups: a conventional low back exercise group (CE) and a supported exercise group (SE; CE plus upper back, neck, and shoulder exercises). The Modified Oswestry Disability Questionnaire (MODQ) was used to evaluate the disability status and the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) was used to identify the pain states of the patients. In addition, neck, lumbar and shoulder isokinetic and isometric strengths of the patients were evaluated. The CE group performed lumbar stretching, mobilization and stabilization exercises in addition to low-back and abdominal isometric and concentric strengthening exercises. The SE group performed static stretching and isotonic exercises for the neck, upper-back, and shoulder muscles, in addition to the exercises performed in CE group. The exercises were implemented 3 days a week for 6 weeks in both groups. Following the 6-week exercise periods in both groups, statistically significant (p < 0.01) improvements were observed in the patients' levels of pain and the scores of MODQ reflecting an easing of disability. With respect to the levels of pain and disability, the improvements observed in the SE group was significantly (p < 0.01) greater than the improvement observed in the CE group. Based on the findings of this study, we can conclude that a low back exercise program used in combination with neck, shoulder and upper back exercises reduces the level of pain and disability in patients with chronic low back pain more prominently than conventional low back exercises.

Effects of manual therapy and exercise targeting the hips in patients with low-back pain-A randomized controlled trial

RATIONALE

The benefits of providing manual therapy and exercise targeting the hips in individuals with mechanical low-back pain (LBP) are not well established.

OBJECTIVES

The objective in this study is to determine whether a formal prescriptive treatment protocol for the hips improves outcomes in patients with a primary complaint of mechanical LBP.

METHODS

Eighty-four (84) subjects (50 males, 46.1 ± 16.2 years) were randomized to 1 of 2 groups: pragmatic treatment of the lumbar spine only (LBP) (n = 39) or pragmatic treatment of the lumbar spine and prescriptive treatment of bilateral hips (LBP + HIP) (n = 45). Pragmatic treatment of the lumbar spine was based upon published clinical guidelines. Prescriptive treatment of the hips involved the use of 3 hip exercises targeting the gluteal musculature and 3 mobilization techniques targeting the hips. Subjects were assessed at baseline, 2 weeks, and at discharge with the following measures: Modified Oswestry Disability Index, Numeric Pain Rating Scale, a global rating of change (GRoC) score, the patient acceptable symptom state (PASS), and patient satisfaction.

RESULTS

At 2 weeks, significant differences between groups differences were found in GRoC and patient satisfaction (P < .05) favoring the LBP + HIP group. At discharge, there were significant differences on the Modified Oswestry Disability Index, numeric pain rating scale, GRoC, and patient satisfaction favoring the LBP + HIP group (P < .05). Effect sizes were small to medium.

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that a prescriptive treatment of the hips may be of clinical value to individuals presenting with the primary complaint of mechanical LBP.

Strategies to overcome size and mechanical disadvantages in manual therapy

The practice of manual therapy (MT) is often difficult when providing care for large patients and for practitioners small in stature or with other physical limitations. Many MT techniques can be modified using simple principles to require less exertion, permitting consistency with standards of practice even in the presence of physical challenges. Commonly used MT techniques are herein described and demonstrated with alternative preparatory and movement methods, which can also be adopted for use in other techniques. These alternative techniques and the procedures used to adapt them warrant discussion among practitioners and educators in order to implement care, consistent with the best treatment evidence for many common musculoskeletal (MSK) conditions. The inclusion in educational curricula and MT training programs is recommended to enrich skill development in physical therapists (PTs), spanning entry-level practitioners to those pursuing advanced manual skills.

The effects of caudal mobilisation with movement (MWM) and caudal self-mobilisation with movement (SMWM) in relation to restricted internal rotation in the hip: A randomised control pilot study

BACKGROUND

A loss of internal rotation (IR) of the hip is associated with hip pathology. Improving IR may improve hip range of motion (ROM) or prevent hip pathology.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to compare the immediate effects of caudal mobilisation with movement (MWM) and caudal self-mobilisation with movement (SMWM) on young healthy male subjects with reduced IR of the hip.

DESIGN

A randomised controlled trial was performed. Twenty-Two subjects were randomised into a MWM group (n = 6), SMWM group (n = 8) or a control group (n = 8).

METHOD

The primary outcome measures included the functional internal rotation test (FIRT) for the hip and the passive seated internal rotation test (SIRT) for the hip. Outcomes were captured at baseline and immediately after one treatment of MWMs, SMWMs or control.

RESULTS

A two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), group × time interaction was conducted. The ANOVA revealed the only significant improvement was in the MWM group for the FIRT (p = 0.01), over the control group. Subjects with reduced IR of the hip who receive a single session of MWMs exhibited significantly improved functional IR of their hip than the control group.

CONCLUSIONS

From the data presented, it can be suggested that caudal MWMs of the hip appear to have a positive effect on functional IR of healthy young hips. This may be due to addressing the positional fault theory or the arthrogenic muscular inhibition theory. SMWMs may be effective in augmenting treatments for patients waiting for hip operations.

What is the pain source? A case report of a patient with low back pain and bilateral hip osteonecrosis

BACKGROUND

Low back pain is a common symptom arising from many possible sources and includes the possibility of the contribution of remote pathology. This report describes a patient with bilateral osteonecrosis of the femoral heads presenting with a primary symptom of low back pain.

CASE PRESENTATION

A 37-year-old male presented for evaluation of dominant pain that existed for approximately 6-12 months and was located in the right low back. Milder pain was also reported in the right hip. Low back and hip pain were both aggravated by weight-bearing activities. An evidence-based diagnostic evaluation revealed little indication for a primary pain source originating from low back structures. Radiographs revealed bilateral osteonecrosis with evidence of left femoral head collapse.

CONCLUSION

Hip osteonecrosis may have contributed to an atypical presentation of low back pain due to aberrant localization of pain and/or combined with altered biomechanical loading of musculoskeletal structures.

Restricted hip mobility: clinical suggestions for self-mobilization and muscle re-education

Restricted hip mobility has shown strong correlation with various pathologies of the hip, lumbar spine and lower extremity. Restricted mobility can consequently have deleterious effects not only at the involved joint but throughout the entire kinetic chain. Promising findings are suggesting benefit with skilled joint mobilization intervention for clients with various hip pathologies. Supervised home program intervention, while lacking specifically for the hip joint, are demonstrating promising results in other regions of the body. Application of an accompanying home program for the purpose of complementing skilled, in clinic intervention is advisable for those clients that respond favorably to such methodology.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

5.

Elimination of intermittent chronic low back pain in a recreational golfer following improvement of hip range of motion impairments

BACKGROUND

The biomechanical relationship between the hip and low back is well described and impairment of hip range of motion is thought to affect lumbar spine function, possibly leading to increased loading and subsequent symptoms. However therapy for low back pain (LBP) patients is commonly directed solely to the low back area overlooking possible hip impairment.

CASE DESCRIPTION

A 56-year-old male recreational golfer presented with a chronic golf-related low back complaint. Previous conservative therapy targeting the spine did not result in complete symptom relief. A working diagnosis of L4-S1 facet joint irritation and lower lumbar segmental instability secondary to bilateral hip ROM impairment was established. A trial of therapy strictly addressing the hip ROM impairments was initiated and following 2 treatment sessions, a complete resolution of symptoms was achieved and maintained at a 2-month follow-up.

DISCUSSION

This case demonstrated a complete and rapid relief of un-resolving low back pain with a management strategy focused on hip ROM impairments. Clinicians should remember to look beyond the local area of complaint and appreciate the interdependent nature of the musculoskeletal system.