scholarly journals Effect of Spinal Manipulation on Pain Sensitivity, Postural Sway, and Healthrelated Quality of Life among Patients with Non-specific Chronic Low Back Pain: A Randomised Control Trial

Author(s):  
Kanchan Kumar Sarker ◽  
Jasobanta Sethi ◽  
Umasankar Mohanty
2020 ◽  
Vol 34 (12) ◽  
pp. 1449-1457 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hanieh Ahmadi ◽  
Hanieh Adib ◽  
Maryam Selk-Ghaffari ◽  
Misagh Shafizad ◽  
Siavash Moradi ◽  
...  

Objective: To investigate the effect of the Feldenkrais method versus core stability exercises on pain, disability, quality of life and interoceptive awareness in patients with chronic non-specific low back pain. Design: A single-blinded, randomised, controlled trial. Setting: Outpatient, sports medicine clinic of Mazandaran medical university. Participants: Sixty patients with chronic non-specific low back pain randomised equally into the Feldenkrais method versus core stability exercises groups. Intervention: Intervention group received Feldenkrais method consisting of training theoretical content and supervised exercise therapy two sessions per week for five weeks. Control group received educational programme and home-based core stability exercises for five weeks. Outcome measures: All patients were examined by World Health Organization’s Quality of life Questionnaire, McGill Pain Questionnaire, Oswestry Disability Questionnaire and Multidimensional Assessment of Interoceptive Awareness Questionnaire. All outcomes were measured at baseline and the end of the intervention Results: There were statistically significant differences between groups for quality of life ( P = 0.006, from 45.51 to 60.49), interoceptive awareness ( P > 0.001, from 2.74 to 4.06) and disability ( P = 0.021, from 27.17 to 14.5) in favour of the Feldenkrais method. McGill pain score significantly decreased in both the Feldenkrais (from 15.33 to 3.63) and control groups (from 13.17 to 4.17), but there were no between-groups differences ( P = 0.16). Conclusion: Feldenkrais method intervention gave increased benefits in improving quality of life, improving interoceptive awareness and reducing disability index.


Author(s):  
Yen-Mou Lu ◽  
Chung-Hwan Chen ◽  
Yi-Jing Lue

BACKGROUND: Sex and gender affect responses to pain, but little is known about disability and quality of life. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the effects of sex and gender on disability and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in patients with low back pain. METHODS: Ninety-three patients with low back pain were included in this cross-sectional survey study. Disability, HRQOL and gender identity were respectively assessed with the Oswestry Disability Index, Short Form-36 and Bem Sex Role Inventory. The participants were classified into four gender role orientations (masculinity, femininity, androgyny and undifferentiated). One-way analysis of variance was used to analyze both the sex and the gender role orientation. RESULTS: Females had higher disability than males (p< 0.05), but in gender identity, no significant difference was found. Seven domains of HRQOL were lower than the healthy norms. Males experienced greater impacts than females on vitality and mental health (p< 0.05). For gender identity, five domains of HRQOL had significant differences (p< 0.05). Masculinity orientation had the least impact on four domains (p< 0.05), while undifferentiated orientation had the largest impact on all domains. CONCLUSION: Sex and gender effects can be used to analyze disability and HRQOL in patients with low back pain. Females have higher disability, while HRQOL is greatly influenced by different gender role orientations.


2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Casper Glissmann Nim ◽  
Gregory Neil Kawchuk ◽  
Berit Schiøttz-Christensen ◽  
Søren O’Neill

Abstract Background In a prior randomized trial, we demonstrated that participants receiving spinal manipulative therapy at a pain-sensitive segment instead of a stiff segment experienced increased mechanical pressure pain thresholds. We hypothesized that the targeted segment mediated this increase through a segment-dependent neurophysiological reflective pathway. Presently, it is not known if this decrease in pain sensitivity is associated with clinical improvement. Therefore, we performed an explorative analysis to examine if changes in experimental pain sensitivity (mechanical and thermal) and lumbar stiffness were further dependent on clinical improvement in disability and patient-reported low back pain. Methods This study is a secondary explorative analysis of data from the randomized trial that compared 132 participants with chronic low back pain who received lumbar spinal manipulative therapy applied at either i) the stiffest segment or ii) the segment having the lowest pain threshold (i.e., the most pain-sensitive segment). We collected data at baseline, after the fourth session of spinal manipulation, and at 14-days follow-up. Participants were dichotomized into responders/non-responders using different clinical variables (disability and patient-reported low back pain) with varying threshold values (0, 30, and 50% improvement). Mixed models were used to assess changes in experimental outcomes (stiffness and pain sensitivity). The fixed interaction terms were time, segment allocation, and responder status. Results We observed a significant increase in mechanical pressure pain thresholds for the group, which received spinal manipulative therapy at the most pain-sensitive segment independent of whether they improved clinically or not. Those who received spinal manipulation at the stiffest segment also demonstrated increased mechanical pain sensitivity, but only in the subgroup with clinical improvement. We did not observe any changes in lumbar stiffness. Conclusion Our results suggest the existence of two different mechanistic pathways associated with the spinal manipulation target. i) A decrease of mechanical pain sensitivity independent of clinical outcome (neurophysiological) and ii) a decrease as a reflection of the clinical outcome. Together, these observations may provide a novel framework that improves our understanding of why some respond to spinal manipulative therapy while others do not. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04086667 registered retrospectively September 11th 2019.


2020 ◽  
Vol 39 (04) ◽  
pp. 300-305
Author(s):  
Ana Carla Schimidt ◽  
Paula de Oliveira Herzinger ◽  
Danielle Pacheco Matias ◽  
Leonardo C. Welling

AbstractLow back pain is defined as pain located between the lower rib cage and the gluteal folds, and its etiology is multifactorial, considerably affecting quality of life. The aim of this literature review was to analyze the influence of the Pilates method on the symptoms of patients with nonspecific low back pain, which is considered a promising treatment for this type of pathology. A narrative review of the literature was carried out using the PubMed, Pedro, Scopus and Scielo databases. To perform the search, Pilates AND Low back nonspecific AND Pain were used as keywords. Articles published in the last 5 years, randomized clinical trials that verified the influence of the Pilates method in adult individuals with unspecified low back pain and full text in English were included. Of the 77 articles identified, 7 articles met the inclusion criteria, 7 analyzed the primary outcomes of pain intensity and disability, 5 articles compared Pilates with other rehabilitation techniques and 2 studies compared the effectiveness of Pilates solo with Pilates apparatus. It was concluded that all the techniques that were compared with Pilates are effective, being difficult to affirm the superiority of Pilates over them in relation to the reduction of pain and disability and improvement of quality of life. However, the Pilates method has shown good results in pain perception and intensity, functional capacity, fear of movement and the idea that movement can worsen your condition, muscle strength, range of motion and flexibility.


2017 ◽  
Vol 26 (5) ◽  
pp. 452-458 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barton E. Anderson ◽  
Kellie C. Huxel Bliven

Clinical Scenario:Research has shown a link between poor core stability and chronic, nonspecific low back pain, with data to suggest that alterations in core muscle activation patterns, breathing patterns, lung function, and diaphragm mechanics may occur. Traditional treatment approaches for chronic, nonspecific low back pain focus on exercise and manual therapy interventions, however it is not clear whether breathing exercises are effective in treating back pain.Focused Clinical Question:In adults with chronic, nonspecific low back pain, are breathing exercises effective in reducing pain, improving respiratory function, and/or health related quality of life?Summary of Key Findings:Following a literature search, 3 studies were identified for inclusion in the review. All reviewed studies were critically appraised at level 2 evidence and reported improvements in either low back pain or quality of life following breathing program intervention.Clinical Bottom Line:Exercise programs were shown to be effective in improving lung function, reducing back pain, and improving quality of life. Breathing program frequencies ranged from daily to 2–3 times per week, with durations ranging from 4 to 8 weeks. Based on these results, athletic trainers and physical therapists caring for patients with chronic, nonspecific low back pain should consider the inclusion of breathing exercises for the treatment of back pain when such treatments align with the clinician’s own judgment and clinical expertise and the patient’s preferences and values.Strength of Recommendation:Grade B evidence exists to support the use of breathing exercises in the treatment of chronic, nonspecific low back pain.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document