scholarly journals Manipulative and manual therapies in the management of patients with prior lumbar surgery: A systematic review

2021 ◽  
Vol 42 ◽  
pp. 101261
Author(s):  
Clinton J. Daniels ◽  
Zachary A. Cupler ◽  
Jordan A. Gliedt ◽  
Sheryl Walters ◽  
Alec L. Schielke ◽  
...  
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Clinton J Daniels ◽  
Zachary A. Cupler ◽  
Jordan A Gliedt ◽  
Sheryl Walters ◽  
Alec L Schielke ◽  
...  

Abstract BackgroundThe purpose was to identify, summarize, and rate scholarly literature that describes manipulative and manual therapy following lumbar surgery.MethodsThe review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and was registered with PROSPERO. PubMed, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, ICL, CINAHL, and PEDro were searched through July 2019. Articles were screened independently by at least two reviewers for inclusion. Articles included described the practice, utilization, and/or clinical decision making to post surgical intervention with manipulative and/or manual therapies. Data extraction consisted of principal findings, pain and function/disability, patient satisfaction, opioid/medication consumption, and adverse events. Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network critical appraisal checklists were utilized to assess study quality.ResultsLiterature search yielded 1916 articles, 348 duplicates were removed, 109 full-text articles were screened and 50 citations met inclusion criteria. There were 37 case reports/case series, 3 randomized controlled trials, 3 pilot studies, 5 systematic/scoping/narrative reviews, and 2 commentaries. ConclusionThe findings of this review may help inform practitioners who utilize manipulative and/or manual therapies regarding levels of evidence for patients with prior lumbar surgery. Following lumbar surgery, the evidence indicated inpatient neural mobilization does not improve outcomes. There is inconclusive evidence to recommend for or against most manual therapies after most surgical interventions.Trial registrationProspectively registered with PROSPERO (#CRD42020137314). Registered 24 January 2020.


2018 ◽  
Vol 2018 ◽  
pp. 1-15 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin Y. Chang ◽  
Wellington K. Hsu

As the use of minimally invasive spine (MIS) fusion approaches continues to grow, increased scrutiny is being placed on its outcomes and efficacies against traditional open fusion surgeries. While there are many factors that contribute to the success of achieving spinal arthrodesis, selecting the optimal fusion biologic remains a top priority. With an ever-expanding market of bone graft substitutes, it is important to evaluate each of their use as it pertains to MIS techniques. This review will summarize the important characteristics and properties of various spinal biologics used in minimally invasive lumbar surgeries and compare their fusion rates via a systematic review of published literature.


2005 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-34 ◽  
Author(s):  
César Fernández de las Peñas ◽  
Mónica Sohrbeck Campo ◽  
Josué Fernández Carnero ◽  
Juan Carlos Miangolarra Page

2016 ◽  
Vol 44 (3) ◽  
pp. 249-254
Author(s):  
Sergio Hernando Cabarique-Serrano ◽  
Víctor Hugo González-Cárdenas ◽  
Jean Pierre Dussán-Crosby ◽  
Rodolfo Enrique Páez-González ◽  
María Alejandra Ramírez

2015 ◽  
Vol 23 (01) ◽  
pp. 89-96
Author(s):  
Debora Wanderley ◽  
Andrea Lemos ◽  
Larissa Carvalho ◽  
Daniella Oliveira

2016 ◽  
Vol 44 (3) ◽  
pp. 249-254
Author(s):  
Sergio Hernando Cabarique-Serrano ◽  
Víctor Hugo González-Cárdenas ◽  
Jean Pierre Dussán-Crosby ◽  
Rodolfo Enrique Páez-González ◽  
María Alejandra Ramírez

2018 ◽  
Vol 32 (5) ◽  
pp. 553-563 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vanessa Veis Ribeiro ◽  
Vanessa Pedrosa ◽  
Kelly Cristina Alves Silverio ◽  
Mara Behlau

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Katherine A. Pohlman ◽  
Kristian Anderson ◽  
Beth Carleo ◽  
Brian Gleberzon

AbstractCorrespondence from Yu et al. identify methodological issues with the systematic review of manual therapy for pediatric manuscript. Like any research study, limitations are important for readers to keep in consideration when reviewing study findings. The primary authors maintain full confidence in the use of the review to provide practicing clinicians with a comprehensive overview of the limited and low-quality available evidence regarding manual therapies for the pediatric patient.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document