Spinal mechanical impulsive manipulation versus conventional physiotherapy for chronic low back pain: differences in range of lumbar motion and trunk muscle strength

doi:10.3969/j.issn.2095-4344.1009

Abstract

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: Chronic low back pain has been shown to be related to gestures, muscle and activity characteristics. Etiological factors include decreased or excessive lumbar lordosis, decreased abdominal muscle strength, imbalance of trunk flexors and extensors, and decreased lumbar mobility. Spinal manipulation or chiropractic surgery is a conservative treatment for spinal dysfunction and pain at abroad.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy of spinal mechanical impulsive manipulation and conventional physiotherapy by subjective pain and dysfunction as well as range of motion and trunk muscle strength in the patients with chronic low back pain.

METHODS: This was a prospective, randomized controlled clinical trial. Sixty subjects with an age of 18 to 65 years, who had a primary complaint of low back pain at least 6-week duration with or without radiating pain to the lower extremity were included, and randomized into trial (spinal mechanical impulsive manipulation) and control (conventional physiotherapy) groups. Treatment programs were performed twice weekly, for 4 weeks. The Visual Analogue Scale scores, Roland-Morris dysfunction questionnaire, lumbar spinal range of motion and trunk muscle strength before and 1 month after treatment were detected.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: (1) All subjects had a significant decrease in pain and disability after intervention (P < 0.05). The Visual Analogue Scale score at 1 month after treatment in the trial group was significantly lower than those in the control group (P < 0.05). (2) Both groups showed significant improvements in lumbar flexion, extension, flexor and extensor strength after treatment (P < 0.05). The lumbar flexion range of motion and extensor muscle strength at 1 month after treatment were increased significantly in the trial group compared with the control group (P < 0.05). (3) Both groups showed significant improvements in trunk extensor strength after treatment (P < 0.05). The trunk extensor strength improvement at 1 month after treatment in the trial group was significantly superior to that in the control group (P < 0.05). (4) These results suggest that spinal mechanical impulsive manipulation is more effective in reducing pain and improving range of motion and trunk muscle strength in patients with low back pain compared with conventional physiotherapy.

中国组织工程研究杂志出版内容重点：人工关节；骨植入物；脊柱；骨折；内固定；数字化骨科；组织工程

Key words: Low Back Pain, Spine, Physical Therapy Modalities, Muscle Strength, Tissue Engineering

CLC Number:

R493

Zhu Zhongliang, Yu Xiaojie, Liu Bangzhong, Zhu Min, Zhao Liya, Yan Dongdong. Spinal mechanical impulsive manipulation versus conventional physiotherapy for chronic low back pain: differences in range of lumbar motion and trunk muscle strength[J]. Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research, 2018, 22(35): 5637-5641.

Figures/Tables 4

References

[1] Durmus D, Akyol Y, Alayli G, et al. Effects of electrical stimulation program on trunk muscle strength, functional capacity, quality of life, and depression in the patients with low back pain: a randomized controlled trial. Rheumatol Int. 2009;29(8):947-954.

[2] Ferreira ML, Ferreira PH, Latimer J, et al. Relationship between spinal stiffness and outcome in patients with chronic low back pain. Man Ther. 2009;14(1):61-67.

[3] Stubbs M, Harris M, Solomonow M, et al. Ligamento-muscular protective reflex in the lumbar spine of the feline. J Electromyogr Kinesiol. 1998;8(4):197-204.

[4] Bronfort G, Maiers MJ, Evans RL, et al. Supervised exercise, spinal manipulation, and home exercise for chronic low back pain: a randomized clinical trial. Spine J. 2011;11(7):585-598.

[5] Giles LG, Muller R. Chronic spinal pain syndromes: a clinical pilot trial comparing acupuncture, anonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug, and spinal manipulation. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 1999;22(6): 376-381.

[6] 陈一,俞晓杰,施海涛,等.机械力量脊椎矫正治疗老年性腰痛的临床疗效研究[J].老年医学与保健,2015,21(6):380-383,390.

[7] Goodsell M, Lee M, Latimer J. Short-term effects of lumbar posteroanterior mobilization in individuals withlow-back pain. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2000;23(5):332-342.

[8] Nansel D, Peneff A, Cremata E, et al. Time course considerations for the effects of unilateral lower cervicaladjustments with respect to the amelioration of cervical lateral-flexion passive end-range asymmetry. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 1990;13(6):297-304.

[9] Colloca CJ, Keller TS. Electromyographic reflex responses to mechanical force, manually assisted spinal manipulative therapy. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2001;26(10):1117-1124.

[10] Indahl A, Kaigle AM, Reikeras O, et al. Interaction between the porcine lumbar intervertebral disc, zygapophysial joints, and paraspinal muscles. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1997;22(24): 2834-2840.

[11] Cholewicki J, McGill SM. Mechanical stability of the in vivo lumbar spine: implications for injury andchronic low back pain. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 1996;11(1):1-15.

[12] Ng JK, Kippers V, Parnianpour M, et al. EMG activity normalization for trunk muscles in subjects with and without backpain. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2002;34(7):1082-1086.

[13] Fritz JM, Hebert J, Koppenhaver S, et al. Beyond minimally important change: defining a successful outcome of physicaltherapy for patients with low back pain. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2009;34(25):2803-2809.

[14] Fritz JM, Koppenhaver SL, Kawchuk GN, et al. Preliminary investigation of the mechanisms underlying the effects ofmanipulation: exploration of a multivariate model including spinal stiffness, multifidus recruitment, and clinical findings. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2011;36(21):1772-1781.

[15] Dishman JD, Bulbulian R. Spinal reflex attenuation associated with spinal manipulation. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2000;25(19): 2519-2524; discussion 2525.