Spinal manipulative therapy for low back pain: A systematic review

Abstract

Objectives: Gather and analyse relevant literature on spinal manipulative therapy for low back pain through systematic review to present a balanced and impartial summary of the findings. The aim of this systematic review was to investigate the efficacy of spinal manipulative therapy in patients with low back pain.

Methods: Databases searched included COCHRANE, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PEDro, PUBMED, WEB OF KNOWLEDGE, INGENTA CONNECT and GOOGLE SCHOLAR between January 2000 and January 2008. Sixteen articles were retrieved. Standardised inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied to select articles relevant to the review question. Seven studies were excluded and nine studies were included. In the next step, the methodological quality of the included studies was assessed with the PEDro scale, which rated the studies from 0 to 10.

Results: Methodological quality scores ranged from 4 to 8 out of a possible 10. Spinal manipulative therapy can be preferred for short-term relief of low back pain when compared with general exercise and dynamic strengthening exercises, which is revealed by a high quality study, moderate quality studies and a low quality study. Spinal manipulative therapy combined with exercise is more effective than exercise alone, which is revealed by a high quality study.

Conclusions: Further studies are needed to improve the quality of the evidence. There is evidence that spinal manipulative therapy combined with exercise is more effective than other procedures like spinal manipulative therapy, exercise or physician consultation alone.     

Does core stability exercise improve lumbopelvic stability (through endurance tests) more than general exercise in chronic low back pain? A quasi-randomized controlled trial

Introduction: The aim was to compare core stability and general exercises (GEs) in chronic low back pain (LBP) patients based on lumbopelvic stability (LPS) assessment through three endurance core stability tests. There is a controversy about preference of core stability exercise (CSE) over other types of exercise for chronic LBP. Studies which have compared these exercises used other outcomes than those related to LPS. As it is claimed that CSE enhances back stability, endurance tests for LPS were used. Materials and Methods: A 16-session CSE program and a GE program with the same duration were conducted for two groups of participants. Frequency of interventions for both groups was three times a week. Forty-three people (aged 18–60 years) with chronic non-specific LBP were alternately allocated to core stability (n = 22) or GE group (n = 21) when admitted. The primary outcomes were three endurance core stability tests including: (1) trunk flexor; (2) trunk extensor; and (3) side bridge tests. Secondary outcomes were disability and pain. Measurements were taken at baseline and the end of the intervention. Results: After the intervention, test times increased and disability and pain decreased within groups. There was no signi?cant difference between two groups in increasing test times (p = 0.23 to p = 0.36) or decreasing disability (p = 0.16) and pain (p = 0.73). Conclusions: CSE is not more effective than GE for improving endurance core stability tests and reducing disability and pain in chronic non-specific LBP patients.     

Specific stabilisation exercise for spinal and pelvic pain: a systematic review

The aim of this study was to conduct a systematic review of the efficacy of specific stabilisation exercise for spinal and pelvic pain. Randomised clinical trials evaluating specific stabilisation exercise were identified and retrieved. Outcomes were disability, pain, return to work, number of episodes, global perceived effect, or health-related quality of life. A single trial reported that specific stabilisation exercise was more effective than no treatment but not more effective than spinal manipulative therapy for the management of cervicogenic headache and associated neck pain. Single trials reported that specific stabilisation exercise was effective for pelvic pain and for prevention of recurrence after an acute episode of low back pain but not to reduce pain or disability associated with acute low back pain. Pooled analyses revealed that, for chronic low back pain, specific stabilisation exercise was superior to usual medical care and education but not to manipulative therapy, and no additional effect was found when specific stabilisation exercise was added to a conventional physiotherapy program. A single trial reported that specific stabilisation exercise and a surgical procedure to reduce pain and disability in chronic low back pain were equally effective. The available evidence suggests that specific stabilisation exercise is effective in reducing pain and disability in chronic but not acute low back pain. Single trials indicate that specific stabilisation exercise can be helpful in the treatment of cervicogenic headache and associated neck pain, pelvic pain, and in reducing recurrence after acute low back pain.     

Effect of different exercise programs on non-specific chronic low back pain and disability in people who perform sedentary work

BackgroundThis study compared the short- and long-term effects of different exercise programs on lumbar muscle function, cross-sectional area of the multifidus muscle, functional disability and low back pain in people who perform sedentary work.MethodsA total of 70 volunteer women with sedentary occupations suffering from low back pain were randomized to either the lumbar stabilization exercise program group or the lumbar muscle strengthening exercise program group. All subjects entered the 20-week exercise programs. The measurement of the cross-sectional area of the multifidus muscle was executed by using an ultrasound system, isokinetic peak torque was measured applying an isokinetic dynamometer.FindingsThe results indicated that the 20-week exercise programs reduced low back pain and functional disability. Positive effects for the cross-sectional area of the multifidus muscle, functional disability and low back pain lasted for 4 weeks after the application of lumbar muscle strengthening exercise program and for 12 weeks after the application of lumbar stabilization exercise program. The lumbar muscle strength increased and lasted for 8 weeks after both exercise programs.InterpretationThe 20-week lumbar stabilization exercise and muscle strengthening exercise programs were efficacious in decreasing LBP and functional disability in people performing sedentary work, however the lumbar stabilization exercise program was more effective, and this effect lasted for 12 weeks after completion of the program.     

Randomised Controlled Trials on the Efficacy Of Spinal Manipulation Therapy in The Treatment of Low Back Pain

Abstract

Low back pain presents a major challenge to health care professionals within both primary and secondary care. Spinal manipulation therapy is one option from a range of treatment techniques which until recently has lacked credibility, in part due to a dearth of published, plausible explanations of the mechanisms through which it works. Such explanations are starting to emerge but rigorous evaluations of spinal manipulation therapy over other treatment modalities remain few in number. This paper builds on the review by Mohseni-Bandpei et al. (Mohseni-Bandpei MA, Stephenson R, Richardson B. Spinal manipulation in the treatment of low back pain: a review of the literature with particular emphasis on randomised controlled trials. Phys Ther Rev 1998; 3:185–94), by reviewing literature in particular randomised controlled trials published in the field since that date. It is concluded that the efficacy of manipulation for patients with acute or chronic low back pain remains unconvincing and that the literature remains blighted by inconsistency of definitions of interventions and by methodological flaws.     

Lumbar kinematic variability during gait in chronic low back pain and associations with pain,disability and isolated lumbar extension strength

BackgroundChronic low back pain is a multifactorial condition with many dysfunctions including gait variability. The lumbar spine and its musculature are involved during gait and in chronic low back pain the lumbar extensors are often deconditioned. It was therefore of interest to examine relationships between lumbar kinematic variability during gait, with pain, disability and isolated lumbar extension strength in participants with chronic low back pain.MethodsTwenty four participants with chronic low back pain were assessed for lumbar kinematics during gait, isolated lumbar extension strength, pain, and disability. Angular displacement and kinematic waveform pattern and offset variability were examined.FindingsAngular displacement and kinematic waveform pattern and offset variability differed across movement planes; displacement was highest and similar in frontal and transverse planes, and pattern variability and offset variability higher in the sagittal plane compared to frontal and transverse planes which were similar. Spearman's correlations showed significant correlations between transverse plane pattern variability and isolated lumbar extension strength (r = − .411) and disability (r = .401). However, pain was not correlated with pattern variability in any plane. The r² values suggested 80.5% to 86.3% of variance was accounted for by other variables.InterpretationConsidering the lumbar extensors role in gait, the relationship between both isolated lumbar extension strength and disability with transverse plane pattern variability suggests that gait variability may result in consequence of lumbar extensor deconditioning or disability accompanying chronic low back pain. However, further study should examine the temporality of these relationships and other variables might account for the unexplained variance.     

Effect of pulsed electromagnetic field on nonspecific low back pain patients: a randomized controlled trial

BackgroundFurther research on pulsed electromagnetic field (PEMF) effects on the different conditions of low back pain was warranted due to lack of studies in this area.ObjectivesTo investigate the effects of pulsed electromagnetic field therapy with 50 Hz frequency, with low intensity of 20 Gauss compared to conventional non-invasive treatment modalities in patients with chronic non-specific low back pain.MethodsDesign – A prospective, randomized, patient-blinded, controlled trial. Setting – The study was conducted at Outpatient Physiotherapy Clinic in Cairo, Egypt. The study was conducted between May 2015 and September 2016. Participants – Fifty participants with non-specific low back pain enrolled into experimental and control groups. Interventions – The experimental group received the Conventional physical therapy Protocol as well as magnetic field, while the control group received the same Conventional physical therapy and sham electromagnetic field. Both groups received 12 sessions over 4 weeks’ period. Outcome measures – Primary outcome measures was pain intensity while the secondary outcome measures were disability and lumbar range of motion – ROM. There were no adverse events occurred during the study.ResultsFifty participants with non-specific low back pain (control group n = 25; experimental group n = 25) were randomized. There were significant between-group differences in pain scores (mean difference – MD 1.52; 95%CI −0.34 to 3.35), function disability (MD 8.14; 95%CI 6.5 to 9.96), Range of Motion (ROM) of lumbar flexion (MD −1.27; 95%CI −1.09 to −1.45), ROM of lumbar extension (MD −1.1; 95%CI −0.97 to −1.23), ROM of lumbar right side bending (MD 8.2; 95%CI 6.56 to 9.84) and ROM of lumbar left side bending (MD 10.4; 95%CI 8.81 to 11.99) in favour of the experimental group.ConclusionAdding pulsed electromagnetic field to Conventional physical therapy Protocol yields superior clinical improvement in pain, functional disability, and lumbar ROM in patients with non-specific low back pain than Conventional physical therapy alone.     

The audible pop is not necessary for successful spinal high-velocity thrust manipulation in individuals with low back pain

OBJECTIVE: To determine the relationship between an audible pop and symptomatic improvement with spinal manipulation in patients with low back pain (LBP). DESIGN: A prospective cohort study. SETTING: Two outpatient physical therapy clinics located in military medical centers. PARTICIPANTS: A cohort of 71 patients with nonradicular LBP referred to physical therapy. INTERVENTIONS: Participants underwent a standardized examination and standardized spinal manipulation treatment program. All patients were treated with a sacroiliac (SI) region manipulative technique and the presence or absence of an audible pop was noted.Main Outcome Measures: Subjects were reassessed 48 hours after the manipulation for changes in range of motion (ROM), numeric pain rating scale (PRS) scores, and modified Oswestry Disability Questionnaire (ODQ) scores. RESULTS: An audible pop occurred in 50 of the 71 subjects during the manipulative procedure. Both groups-those who had an audible pop and those who did not-improved over time in flexion ROM, PRS scores, and modified ODQ scores; however, there were no differences between groups (P>.05). Nineteen of the 71 (27%) patients improved dramatically (mean drop in modified ODQ, 67.6%). In 14 of the 19 dramatic responders, an audible pop occurred. However, the odds ratio (1.2; 95% confidence interval, 0.38-4.04) suggested that the occurrence of a manipulative pop would not improve the odds of achieving a dramatic reduction in symptoms after the manipulation. CONCLUSION: There is no relationship between an audible pop during SI region manipulation and improvement in ROM, pain, or disability in individuals with nonradicular LBP. Additionally, the occurrence of a pop did not improve the odds of a dramatic improvement with manipulation treatment.     

Placebo disclosure does not result in negative changes in mood or attitudes towards health care or the provider

Abstract

Objectives: The purposes of this study were to (1) determine whether disclosure of having received a placebo treatment following participation in a randomized manual therapy trial resulted in changes in negative mood or attitudes towards health care and the provider and (2) examine the association between changes in mood or attitude and changes in clinical outcomes over the two-week study period.

Methods: Participants with low back pain (N = 110) were randomly assigned to receive a spinal manipulative therapy (SMT), a standard placebo SMT in which participants were aware of a chance of receiving a placebo, an enhanced placebo SMT in which participants were instructed ‘the manual therapy technique you will receive has been shown to significantly reduce low back pain in some people,’ or no treatment. Outcomes included pain (Numeric Rating Scale), disability (Oswestry Disability Index), and negative mood and attitudes towards health care and the provider (visual analog scales). Pain and disability were obtained at baseline and two weeks. Mood and attitude measures were assessed at baseline, at the start of the final session, and upon completion of the final session following disclosure of group assignment.

Results: Disclosure of having received a placebo treatment was not associated with worsening of mood or attitudes towards health care or the provider (p > 0.05). A small, but significant (p < 0.05) association was observed between two-week changes in disability and immediate changes in mood (r = 0.31–0.36) upon disclosure of having received a placebo. This analysis indicates an association between larger improvements in disability and more positive changes in mood.

Discussion: Placebo treatment use in clinical practice is common yet controversial due to the deceptive nature. Our findings suggest disclosure of having received a placebo treatment is not associated with adverse changes in negative mood or attitudes towards health care or the provider.     

Effects of eight-week water versus mat pilates on female patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain: Double-blind randomized clinical trial

ObjectiveTo evaluate the effects of water and mat Pilates on pain, disability, and static and dynamic balance in patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain (CNLBP).MethodsTwenty-four participants with CNLBP were randomly allocated into two groups (n = 12) that perform water and mat Pilates exercises for 24 sessions (8-week, 3 sessions per week). The value for pain, disability and balance were measured before and after the exercise program using the Visual Analogue Scale, Oswestry Disability Questionnaire and Biodex Balance System respectively.ResultsA paired t-test revealed significant differences in pain severity and disability in both groups after they performed the Pilates program (P ≤ 0.05). Mat Pilates improved static balance as the participants performed the tests with their eyes open and closed (P = 0.02, P = 0.04). Its effect on dynamic balance, however, was not statistically significant (ES = 0/33, P = 0/34). The same Pilates program performed in water did not show significant effects on balance despite a decline in body sway (P˃0/05). There was no difference between the two groups (P˃0/05).ConclusionThe results suggest that both mat and water Pilates exercise program have beneficial effects on the treatment of LBP. Nevertheless, the low impact of the mat and water Pilates program on balance improvement suggests more investigation on Pilates training or complementary exercises to improve balance in patients with CNLBP.     

Psychometric properties of the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire compared to the Oswestry Disability Index: a systematic review

Abstract

Objectives: To compare the psychometric properties of the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire and the Oswestry Disability Index used to measure physical ability in people with low back pain.

Methods: A literature search of computerised databases from 1980 through June 2009 was performed using search terms: clinical assessment tools, Roland-Morris, questionnaires, back, spine, back pain, Oswestry Disability Index, psychometrics, reliability, validity, specificity and sensitivity. Twenty-three articles were reviewed using an adult population over 18 years old with acute, sub-acute and chronic low back pain.

Results: The Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire and the Oswestry Disability Index demonstrate good reliability in test–retest performance clinically at initial evaluation and up to 6 weeks following interventions. Two studies described the construct validity of the two measures as highly correlated with each other. Overall, it appears that both questionnaires have similar responsiveness rates of 0·76–0·78 but two studies report a responsiveness rate of 0·94 for the Oswestry.

Discussion/Conclusion: The Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire is most sensitive for patients with mild to moderate disability while the Oswestry Disability Index is most effective for persistent severe disability. Clinically, both questionnaires should be considered depending on the patient's objective presentation of disability. The clinician needs to determine either 'mild to moderate' or 'severe persistent disability' after a thorough history and physical exam is completed so that the appropriate questionnaire can be administered. This helps support the clinician's assessment of function, determine a patient's level of disability and provide outcome information.     

Chiropractic Care of Adults With Postpartum-Related Low Back,Pelvic Girdle,or Combination Pain: A Systematic Review

ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to conduct a systematic review (SR) of the literature to assess the effectiveness of specific chiropractic care options commonly used for postpartum low back pain (LBP), pelvic girdle pain (PGP), or combination (LBP and PGP) pain.MethodsA search strategy was developed. Interventions were those manual or other nonpharmacologic therapies commonly used by chiropractors (not requiring additional certifications). The outcomes were self-reported changes in pain or disability self-reported outcomes. We used the Scottish Intercollegiate Guideline Network checklists. Strength of the evidence (excluding cohort studies) was determined using an adapted version of the US Preventive Services Task Force criteria as described in the UK report.ResultsOf the 1611 published articles, 16 were included. These were 5 SRs, 10 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and 1 cohort study. Postpartum LBP (1 RCT): moderate, favorable strength for spinal manipulation therapy/mobilization. Postpartum PGP (4 RCTs): moderate, unclear strength for exercise; and inconclusive, unclear strength for patient education. Postpartum LBP or PGP (3 SRs and 4 RCTs): inconclusive, unclear strength for exercise, self-management, and physiotherapy; while osteopathic manipulative therapy was inconclusive, favorable.ConclusionNo treatment option was identified as having sufficient evidence to make a clear recommendation. This SR identified a scarcity of literature regarding chiropractic care and back pain for postpartum women, as well as inconsistency among the terms LBP, PGP, and combination pain.     

Pilates-based core exercise improves health-related quality of life in people living with chronic low back pain: A pilot study

PurposeTo investigate the effects of Pilates exercise on improving health-related quality of life in people living with chronic low back pain.MethodsThis was a single-blind, randomised clinical trial. Thirty-nine physically active subjects aged between 30 and 70 years with nonspecific chronic low back pain for more than three months were recruited. The study employed a pretest-posttest design, with a 4 -, 8 -, and 26-week follow-up. For eight weeks, the intervention group participated in a group-supervised, mat-based Pilates program, while the control group received the usual pharmacologic and rehabilitation standard of care, including patient education on chronic low back pain. The primary outcome was self-perceived health status measured using the EQ-5D questionnaire in a structured form and a visual analogue scale. Secondary outcomes included intensity of pain and degree of disability.ResultsBy the end of the 8-week Pilates program, the intervention group achieved a better health-related quality of life on the EQ-5D visual analogue score than the control group. In assessing the trends in each individual group regarding pain, the intervention group demonstrated an earlier pain reduction than the control group that lasted until the end of the trial.ConclusionsAn 8-week supervised Pilates-based core exercise program is an effective therapeutic modality for improving self-perceived health status in patients with chronic low back pain. This finding could inform clinicians of better alternatives when they suggest exercise interventions for chronic low back pain.     

Effects of myofascial release in erector spinae myoelectric activity and lumbar spine kinematics in non-specific chronic low back pain: Randomized controlled trial

BackgroundFlexion-relaxation response of the lumbar erector spinae has been previously studied after different interventions such as exercise programs or spinal manipulation, in subjects with chronic low back pain. The objective of the study was to investigate the effects of an isolated myofascial release protocol on erector spinae myoelectric activity and lumbar spine kinematics in chronic low back pain.MethodsThirty-six participants, with nonspecific chronic low back pain, were randomized to myofascial release group (n = 18) receiving four sessions of myofascial treatment, each lasting 40 min, and to control group (n = 18) receiving a sham myofascial release. Electromyographic and kinematic variables as well as pain and disability questionnaires were analyzed.FindingsThere was a bilateral reduction of the flexion relaxation ratio in individuals receiving myofascial release and who did not show myoelectric silence at baseline (right difference M = 0.34, 95% CI [0.16, 0.33], p ≤ .05 and left difference M = 0.45, 95% CI [0.16, 0.73], p ≤ .05). There was also a significant reduction in pain in the myofascial release group (difference M = −9.1, 95% CI [−16.3, −1.8], p ≤ .05) and disability (difference M = −5.6, 95% CI [−9.1, −2.1], p ≤ .05), compared with control group. No significant differences between groups were found for the kinematic variables.InterpretationThe myofascial release protocol contributed to the normalization of the flexion- relaxation response in individuals who did not show myoelectric silence before the intervention, and also showed a significant reduction in pain and disability compared with the sham group.     

Does change in isolated lumbar extensor muscle function correlate with good clinical outcome? A secondary analysis of data on change in isolated lumbar extension strength,pain, and disability in chronic low back pain

Purpose: Secondary analysis of data from studies utilising isolated lumbar extension exercise interventions for correlations among changes in isolated lumbar extension strength, pain, and disability.

Materials and methods: Studies reporting isolated lumbar extension strength changes were examined for inclusion criteria including: (1) participants with chronic low back pain, (2) intervention?≥?four?weeks including isolated lumbar extension exercise, (3) outcome measures including isolated lumbar extension strength, pain (Visual Analogue Scale), and disability (Oswestry Disability Index). Six studies encompassing 281 participants were included. Correlations among change in isolated lumbar extension strength, pain, and disability. Participants were grouped as “met” or “not met” based on minimal clinically important changes and between groups comparisons conducted.

Results: Isolated lumbar extension strength and Visual Analogue Scale pooled analysis showed significant weak to moderate correlations (r?=??0.391 to ?0.539, all p?<?0.001). Isolated lumbar extension strength and Oswestry Disability Index pooled analysis showed significant weak correlations (r?=??0.349 to ?0.470, all p?<?0.001). For pain and disability, isolated lumbar extension strength changes were greater for those “met” compared with those “not met” (p?<?0.001–0.008).

Conclusions: Improvements in isolated lumbar extension strength may be related to positive and meaningful clinical outcomes. As many other performance outcomes and clinical outcomes are not related, isolated lumbar extension strength change may be a mechanism of action affecting symptom improvement.

• Implications for Rehabilitation

• Chronic low back pain is often associated with deconditioning of the lumbar extensor musculature.

• Isolated lumbar extension exercise has been shown to condition this musculature and also reduce pain and disability.

• This study shows significant correlations between increases in isolated lumbar extension strength and reductions in pain and disability.

• Strengthening of the lumbar extensor musculature could be considered an important target for exercise interventions.

     

Association Between Clinical Tests Related to Motor Control Dysfunction and Changes in Pain and Disability After Lumbar Stabilization Exercises in Individuals With Chronic Low Back Pain

ObjectiveTo investigate whether clinical tests used to detect motor control dysfunction can predict improvements in pain and disability in patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain (LBP) who have undergone an 8-week lumbar stabilization exercise program.Study DesignA prospective cohort study.SettingOutpatient physical therapy university clinic.ParticipantsSeventy people with chronic nonspecific LBP were recruited, and 64 completed the exercise program (N=64).InterventionsThe lumbar stabilization program was provided twice a week for 8 weeks.Main Outcome MeasuresPain intensity (11-point numerical rating scale) and disability (Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire) and clinical tests, such as the Deep Muscle Contraction (DMC) scale, Clinical Test of Thoracolumbar Dissociation (CTTD), and Passive Lumbar Extension (PLE) test. Univariate and multivariate linear regression models were used in the prediction analysis.ResultsMean changes in pain intensity and disability following the 8-week stabilization program were ?3.8 (95% confidence interval [CI], ?3.2 to ?4.4) and ?7.4 (95% CI, ?6.3 to ?8.5), respectively. Clinical test scores taken at baseline did not predict changes in pain and disability at 8-week follow-up.ConclusionOur findings revealed that the DMC scale, CTTD, PLE test, clinical tests used to assess motor control dysfunction, do not predict improvements in pain and disability in patients with chronic nonspecific LBP following an 8-week lumbar stabilization exercise program.     

Osteopathic manipulative treatment combined with exercise improves pain and disability in individuals with non-specific chronic neck pain: A pragmatic randomized controlled trial

PurposeTo determine effectiveness of osteopathic manipulative treatment combined with stretching and strengthening exercises in the cervical region on pain and disability in individuals with non-specific chronic neck pain.Methods90 adults with non-specific chronic neck pain were randomized to either exercises group (EG, n = 45) or osteopathic manipulative treatment associated with exercises group (OMT/EG, n = 45). The primary outcomes were obtained by the use of Numeric Pain-Rating Scale (NPRS), Pressure Pain Threshold (PPT) and Neck Disability Index (NDI). Secondary outcomes included range of motion (ROM) for cervical spine rotation, Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire Work/Physical Activity (FABQ-W/PA) and Pain-self efficacy at two different moments: baseline and 4 weeks after the first treatment. Techniques and dosages of OMT were selected pragmatically by a registered osteopath. Generalized Estimating Equations model (GEE), complemented by the Least Significant Difference (LSD) and the intention-to-treat analysis, was used to assess the clinical outcomes.ResultsAnalysis with GEE indicated that OMT/EG reduced pain and disability more than the EG alone after 4 weeks of treatment with statistically significant difference (p < 0,05), as well as cervical active rotation was significantly improved (p = 0.03). There were no between-group differences observed in Pressure Pain Threshold (PPT) measure, Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire and Pain-self efficacy.ConclusionThe association between OMT and exercises reduces pain and improves functional disability more than only exercise for individuals with non-specific chronic neck pain.     

Three Patterns of Spinal Manipulative Therapy for Back Pain and Their Association With Imaging Studies,Injection Procedures,and Surgery: A Cohort Study of Insurance Claims

ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to evaluate the relationship between procedures and care patterns in back pain episodes by analyzing health insurance claims.MethodsWe performed a retrospective cohort study of insurance claims data from a single Fortune 500 company. The 3 care patterns we analyzed were initial spinal manipulative therapy, delayed spinal manipulative therapy, and no spinal manipulative therapy. The 3 procedures analyzed were imaging studies, injection procedures, and back surgery. We considered “escalated care” to be any claims with diagnostic imaging, injection procedures, or back surgery. Modified-Poisson regression modeling was used to determine relative risk of escalated care.ResultsThere were 83 025 claims that were categorized into 10 372 unique patient first episodes. Spinal manipulative therapy was present in 2943 episodes (28%). Initial spinal manipulation was present in 2519 episodes (24%), delayed spinal manipulation was present in 424 episodes (4%), and 7429 (72%) had no evidence of spinal manipulative therapy. The estimated relative risk, adjusted for age, sex, and risk score, for care escalation (eg, imaging, injections, or surgery) was 0.70 (95% confidence interval 0.65-0.75, P < .001) for initial spinal manipulation and 1.22 (95% confidence interval 1.10-1.35, P < .001) for delayed spinal manipulation with no spinal manipulation used as the reference group.ConclusionFor claims associated with initial episodes of back pain, initial spinal manipulative therapy was associated with an approximately 30% decrease in the risk of imaging studies, injection procedures, or back surgery compared with no spinal manipulative therapy. The risk of imaging studies, injection procedures, or back surgery in episodes in the delayed spinal manipulative therapy group was higher than those without spinal manipulative therapy.     

Chiropractic Care for Adults With Pregnancy-Related Low Back,Pelvic Girdle Pain,or Combination Pain: A Systematic Review

ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to conduct a systematic review (SR) of the literature to assess the effectiveness of chiropractic care options commonly used for pregnancy-related low back pain (LBP), pelvic girdle pain (PGP), or combination pain for both experienced practitioners and students of chiropractic.MethodsWe included procedures that were commonly used by chiropractors and not requiring additional certifications. Outcomes were self-reported changes in pain or disability. We used the Scottish Intercollegiate Guideline Network checklists to assess outcomes. For strength of evidence, we used the adapted version of the US Preventive Services Task Force criteria as described in the UK report.ResultsFifty articles were included from 18 SRs, 30 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and 2 cohort studies. Pregnancy LBP (7 SRs and 12 RCTs): moderate, favorable evidence for electrotherapy and osteopathic manipulative therapy; inconclusive, favorable strength for chiropractic care, exercise, and support devices; and inconclusive, unclear strength for spinal manipulative therapy. Pregnancy PGP (4 SRs and 4 RCTs): inconclusive, favorable strength for exercise; and inconclusive, unclear evidence for patient education, information, and support devices. Pregnancy LBP or PGP (13 SRs and 12 RCTs): moderate, unclear evidence for complementary and alternative medicine; moderate, unclear evidence for exercise; inconclusive, favorable evidence for multimodal care, patient education, and physiotherapy; and inconclusive, unclear strength for spinal manipulative therapy, osteopathic manipulative therapy, and support devices.ConclusionAlthough there is a lack of conclusive evidence, many of the interventions have moderate or unclear but favorable evidence.