Comparison of the effects of craniosacral therapy, muscle energy technique, and sensorimotor training on non-specific chronic low back pain

2020 ◽  
Vol 24 (5) ◽  
Author(s):  
Cobra Ghasemi ◽  
Ali Amiri ◽  
Javad Sarrafzadeh ◽  
Mehdi Dadgoo ◽  
Nader Maroufi
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Chronic Low Back Pain ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Sensorimotor Training ◽  
Muscle Energy Technique ◽  
Craniosacral Therapy ◽  
Sf 36 ◽  
Muscle Energy

Background and objectives: The study aimed to compare the effectiveness of craniosacral therapy (CST), muscle energy technique (MET), and sensorimotor training (SMT) on pain, disability, depression, and quality of life of patients with non-specific chronic low back pain (NCLBP). Methodology: In this randomized clinical trial study 45 patients with NCLBP were randomly divided in three groups including CST, SMT, and MET. All groups received 10 sessions CST, SMT, and MET training in 5 weeks. Visual analogue scale (VAS), Oswestry functional disability questionnaire (ODQ), Beck depression inventory-II (BDI-II), and 36-item short form health survey (SF-36) were used to evaluate the pain, disability, depression, and quality of life, respectively, in three times, before treatment, after the last session of treatment, and after 2 months follow up.  Results: The Results showed that VAS, ODI, BDI, and SF-36 changes were significant in the groups SMT, CST and MET (p < 0.001, p < 0.001, p < 0.001). The VAS, ODI, BDI, and SF-36 changes in post-treatment and follow-up times in the CST group were significantly different in comparison to SMT group, and the changes in VAS, ODI, BDI, and SF-36 at after treatment and follow-up times in the MET group compared with the CST group had a significant difference (p < 0.001). Conclusion: Craniosacral therapy, muscle energy technique, and sensorimotor training were all effective in improvement of pain, depression, functional disability, and quality of life of patients with non-specific chronic low back pain. Craniosacral therapy is more effective than muscle energy technique, and sensorimotor training in post-treatment and follow up. The effect of craniosacral therapy was continuous after two months follow up. Keywords: Low Back Pain; Craniosacral Therapy; Muscle Energy Technique; Sensorimotor Training Abbreviations: CST - Craniosacral therapy; MET - Muscle energy technique; SMT - Sensorimotor training; NCLBP - Non-specific chronic low back pain; ODQ - Oswestry functional disability questionnaire; 36-SF - 36-item short form health survey; BDI - Beck depression inventory; ROM - Range of motion Citation: Ghasemi C, Amiri A, Sarrafzadeh J, Dadgoo M, Maroufi N. Comparison of the effects of craniosacral therapy, muscle energy technique, and sensorimotor training on non-specific chronic low back pain Received: 21 July 2020, Reviewed: 14 August 2020, Revised: 15 August 2020, Accepted: 15 August 2020

scholarly journals Effects of craniosacral therapy and sensorimotor training on pain, disability, depression and quality of life of patients with nonspecific chronic low back pain: a randomized clinical trial

2021 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Cobra Ghasemi ◽  
Ali Amiri ◽  
Javad Sarrafzadeh ◽  
Mehdi Dadgoo
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Chronic Low Back Pain ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Sensorimotor Training ◽  
Pain Disability ◽  
Craniosacral Therapy ◽  
Sf 36

Background: Craniosacral therapy (CST) and sensorimotor training (SMT) are two recommended interventions for nonspecific chronic low back pain (NCLBP). This study compares the effects of CST and SMT on pain, functional disability, depression and quality of life in patients with NCLBP. Methodology: A total of 31 patients with NCLBP were randomly assigned to the CST group (n=16) and SMT (n=15). The study patients received 10 sessions of interventions during 5 weeks. Visual analogue scale (VAS), Oswestry disability index (ODI), Beck depression inventory-II (BDI-II), and Short Form-36 (SF-36) questionnaires were used at baseline (before the treatment), after the treatment, and 2 months after the last intervention session. Results were compared and analyzed statistically. Results: Both groups showed significant improvement from baseline to after treatment (p < 0.05). In the CST group, this improvement continued during the follow-up period in all outcomes (p < 0.05), except role emotional domain of SF-36. In the SMT group, VAS, ODI and BDI-II increased during follow-up. Also, all domains of SF-36 decreased over this period. Results of group analysis indicate a significant difference between groups at the end of treatment phase (p < 0.05), except social functioning. Conclusions: Results of our research confirm that 10 sessions of craniosacral therapy (CST) or sensorimotor training (SMT) can significantly control pain, disability, depression, and quality of life in patients with NCLBP; but the efficacy of CST is significantly better than SMT. Key words: Craniosacral therapy; Sensorimotor training; Nonspecific chronic low back pain; Quality of life Citation: Ghasemi C, Amiri A, Sarrafzadeh J, Dadgoo M. Effects of craniosacral therapy and sensorimotor training on pain, disability, depression and quality of life of patients with nonspecific chronic low back pain: a randomized clinical trial. Anaesth. pain intensive care 2021;25(2):189-198. DOI: 10.35975/apic.v25i2.1458 Abbreviations: CST=Craniosacral therapy; SMT=Sensorimotor training; NCLBP=Nonspecific chronic low back pain; VAS=Visual analogue scale; ODI=Oswestry disability index, BDI-II=Beck depression inventory-II, and SF-36=Short Form-36; CSF=cerebral spinal fluid; CSS=craniosacral system; PRM=primary respiratory movements Received: 27 June 2020, Reviewed: 24 July 2020, Accepted: 27 July 2020

scholarly journals Effect of Muscle Energy Technique on Piriformis Tightness in Chronic Low Back Pain with Radiation

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (44) ◽  
pp. 3284-3288
Author(s):  
Mitushi Kishor Deshmukh ◽  
Pratik Arun Phansopkar ◽  
Kiran Kumar
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Range Of Motion ◽  
Relaxation Technique ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Muscle Energy Technique ◽  
Muscle Tightness ◽  
Muscle Energy

BACKGROUND Low back pain is a common condition in India. 90 % of Indian population experience low back pain at least once in their lifetime. Studies show that 98 % low back pain is because of mechanical disorder of spine. Piriformis tightness is one of the most misdiagnosed causes for low back pain or sacroiliac joint dysfunction. Various manual therapy approaches have been studied for reducing muscle tightness. We wanted to assess the effectiveness of muscle energy technique that is post-isometric relaxation technique on piriformis muscle tightness, its effectiveness in relieving low back pain with radiation, and increasing range of motion. METHODS 60 patients were included in the study as per inclusion and exclusion criteria from Ravi Nair Physiotherapy College, Sawangi Meghe, and were randomly assigned in to two groups. The duration of study was 12 days (6 sessions / week) and follow up was taken on 27th day. Subjects in muscle energy technique experimental group were treated with post isometric relaxation technique (PIR), subjects in control group were given simple passive stretching of piriformis. All subjects were educated about proper ergonomics. RESULTS Both interventions post isometric relaxation and simple stretching techniques were effective in terms of pain reduction, ROM (Range of Motion) improvement, piriformis tightness, disability with p < 0.05 with post isometric relaxation technique superseding simple stretching. Moreover, post isometric relaxation technique in muscle energy technique had sustained effects on follow-up in terms of relieving pain, disability and tightness for longer period of time. CONCLUSIONS Muscle energy technique gives immediate relief of pain improving ROM and decreasing tightness of piriformis and disability and has longer lasting effects. KEY WORDS Piriformis Tightness, Muscle Energy Technique, Stretching.

scholarly journals Immediate effects of muscle energy technique and stabilization exercise in patients with chronic low back pain with suspected facet joint origin: A pilot study

2020 ◽  
Vol 40 (02) ◽  
pp. 109-119
Author(s):  
Wahyuddin Wahyuddin ◽  
Mantana Vongsirinavarat ◽  
Keerin Mekhora ◽  
Sunee Bovonsunthonchai ◽  
Rachaneewan Adisaipoapun
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Pain Intensity ◽  
Chronic Low Back Pain ◽  
Facet Joint ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Stabilization Exercise ◽  
Muscle Energy Technique ◽  
Left And Right ◽  
Muscle Energy

Background: Facet joint is a potential structure to be the source of chronic low back pain (LBP) affecting lumbar motion, pain, and disability. Other than the recommended treatment of lumbar stabilization exercise (LSE), several manual procedures including muscle energy technique (MET) are commonly used in physical therapy clinic. However, little evidences of the effects of MET have been reported. Objective: This study aimed to compare the immediate effects of MET and LSE in patients with chronic LBP with suspected facet joint origin. Methods: Twenty-one patients with low back pain were recruited and randomly assigned to receive treatment either MET or LSE. The outcomes were kinematic changes, pain intensity, and disability level. Lumbar active range of motion (ROM) of flexion, extension, left and right lateral flexion, and left and right rotation were evaluated using the three-dimension motion analysis system at baseline and immediately after treatment. Pain intensity was evaluated using visual analogue scale (VAS) at baseline, immediately after, and two days after treatment. Thai version of the modified Oswestry disability questionnaire (ODQ) was utilized at baseline and two days after treatment. The mixed model analysis of variance was used to analyze all outcomes. Results: The results showed that all outcomes were not different between groups after treatments. Although there were statistically significant improvements after the treatments when collapsing the groups, the minimal clinically important change was found only for pain but not for lumbar movements and disabilities scores. Conclusion: The effect of MET and LSE alone in single session might not be intensive enough to improve movements and decrease disability in patients with chronic LBP with suspected facet joint origin.

scholarly journals Comprehensiveness and validity of a multidimensional assessment in patients with chronic low back pain: a prospective cohort study

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas Benz ◽  
Susanne Lehmann ◽  
Achim Elfering ◽  
Peter S. Sandor ◽  
Felix Angst
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Chronic Low Back Pain ◽  
Functional Performance ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Sf 36 ◽  
Explained Variance ◽  
And Function

Abstract Background Chronic low back pain is a multidimensional syndrome affecting physical activity and function, health-related quality of life and employment status. The aim of the study was to quantify the cross-sectional and longitudinal validity of single measurement scales in specific construct domains and to examine how they combine to build a comprehensive outcome, covering the complex construct of chronic low back pain before and after a standardized interdisciplinary pain program. Methods This prospective cohort study assessed 177 patients using the Short Form 36 (SF-36), the Multidimensional Pain Inventory (MPI), the Symptom Checklist-90-Revised (SCL-90-R), the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and 2 functional performance tests, the Back Performance Scale (BPS) and the 6-Minute Walking Distance (6MWD). The comprehensiveness and overlap of the constructs used were quantified cross-sectionally and longitudinally by bivariate correlations, exploratory factor analysis, and effect sizes. Results The mean age of the participants was 48.0 years (+/− 12.7); 59.3% were female. Correlations of baseline scores ranged from r = − 0.01 (BPS with MPI Life control) to r = 0.76 (SF-36 Mental health with MPI Negative mood). SF-36 Physical functioning correlated highest with the functional performance tests (r = 0.58 BPS, 0.67 6MWD) and ODI (0.56). Correlations of change scores (difference of follow-up – baseline score) were consistent but weaker. Factor analysis revealed 2 factors: “psychosocial” and “pain & function” (totally explained variance 44.0–60.9%). Psychosocial factors loaded strongest (up to 0.89 SCL-90-R) on the first factor, covering 2/3 of the explained variance. Pain and function (ing) loaded more strongly on the second factor (up to 0.81 SF-36 Physical functioning at follow-up). All scales showed improvements, with effect sizes ranging from 0.16–0.67. Conclusions Our results confirm previous findings that the chronic low back pain syndrome is highly multifactorial and comprises many more dimensions of health and quality of life than merely back-related functioning. A comprehensive outcome measurement should include the predominant psychosocial domain and a broad spectrum of measurement constructs in order to assess the full complexity of the chronic low back syndrome. Convergence and divergence of the scales capture the overlapping contents and nuances within the constructs.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document