Randomized controlled trial of interferential therapy and manipulative therapy for acute low back pain.

Study Design. A multi-center assessor-blinded randomized clinical trial was conducted. Objectives. To investigate the relative effectiveness of interferential therapy and manipulative therapy for patients with acute low back pain when used as sole treatments and in combination. Summary of Background Data. Both manipulative therapy and interferential therapy are commonly used treatments for low back pain. Evidence for the effectiveness of manipulative therapy is available only for the short term. There is no evidence for interferential therapy and no study has investigated the effectiveness of interferential therapy combined with manipulative therapy. Methods. Consenting subjects (n=240) were randomly assigned to receive a copy of the Back Book and either manipulative therapy (MT; n=80), interferential therapy (IFT; n=80) or combined manipulative therapy and interferential therapy (CT; n=80). Follow-up outcome questionnaires were posted at discharge, 6 and 12 months. Results. The groups were balanced at baseline for low back pain and demographic characteristics. All interventions were found to significantly reduce functional disability and pain and increase quality of life at discharge and to maintain these improvements at 6 and 12 months. No significant differences were found between groups for reported LBP recurrence, work absenteeism, medication consumption, exercise participation and healthcare use at 12 months. Conclusions. For acute low back pain, interferential therapy whether used in isolation or in combination with manipulative therapy was as effective as manipulative therapy alone (in addition to the Back Book).

A descriptive study of the usage of spinal manipulative therapy techniques within a randomised clinical trial in acute low back pain

The majority of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of spinal manipulative therapy have not adequately de?ned the terms ‘mobilization’ and ‘manipulation’, nor distinguished between these terms in reporting the trial interventions. The purpose of this study was to describe the spinal manipulative therapy techniques utilized within a RCT of manipulative therapy (MT; n=80), interferential therapy (IFT; n=80), and a combination of both (CT; n=80) for people with acute low back pain (LBP). Spinal manipulative therapy was de?ned as any ‘mobilization’ (low velocity manual force without a thrust) or ‘manipulation’ (high velocity
thrust) techniques of the spine described by Maitland and Cyriax.
The 16 physiotherapists, all members of the Society of Orthopaedic Medicine, utilized three spinal manipulative therapy patterns in the RCT: Maitland Mobilization (40.4%, n=59), Maitland Mobilization/Cyriax Manipulation (40.4%, n=59) and Cyriax Manipulation (19.1%, n=28). There was a signi?cant difference between the MT and CT groups in their usage of spinal manipulative therapy techniques (w2=9.178; df=2;P=0.01); subjects randomized to the CT group received three times more Cyriax Manipulation (29.2%, n=21/72) than those randomized to the MT group (9.5%, n=7/74; df=1; P=0.003).
The use of mobilization techniques within the trial was comparable with their usage by the general population of physiotherapists in Britain and Ireland for LBP management. However, the usage of manipulation techniques was considerably higher than reported in physiotherapy surveys and may re?ect the postgraduate training of trial therapists.

Exercise and Auricular Acupuncture for Chronic Low Back Pain: A Feasibility Randomised Controlled Trial

Objectives: To evaluate the feasibility of a randomized-controlled trial (RCT) investigating the effects of adding auricular acupuncture (AA) to exercise for participants with chronic low-back pain (CLBP). Methods: Participants with CLBP were recruited from primary care and a university population and were randomly allocated (n=51) to 1 of 2 groups: (1) "Exercise Alone (E)"-12-week program consisting of 6 weeks of supervised exercise followed by 6 weeks unsupervised exercise (n=27); or (2) "Exercise and AA (EAA)"-12-week exercise program and AA (n=24). Outcome measures were recorded at baseline, week 8, week 13, and 6 months. The primary outcome measure was the Oswestry Disability Questionnaire. Results: Participants in the EAA group demonstrated a greater mean improvement of 10.7% points (95% confidence interval, -15.3,-5.7) (effect size=1.20) in the Oswestry Disability Questionnaire at 6 months compared with 6.7% points (95% confidence interval, -11.4,-1.9) in the E group (effect size=0.58). There was also a trend towards a greater mean improvement in quality of life, LBP intensity and bothersomeness, and fear-avoidance beliefs in the EAA group. The dropout rate for this trial was lower than anticipated (15% at 6 mo), adherence with exercise was similar (72% E; 65% EAA). Adverse effects for AA ranged from 1% to 14% of participants. Discussion: Findings of this study showed that a main RCT is feasible and that 56 participants per group would need to be recruited, using multiple recruitment approaches. AA was safe and demonstrated additional benefits when combined with exercise for people with CLBP, which requires confirmation in a fully powered RCT.

The back 2 activity trial: education and advice versus education and advice plus a structured walking programme for chronic low back pain.:education and advice versus education and advice plus a structured walking programme for chronic low back pain

BACKGROUND: Current evidence supports the use of exercise-based treatment for chronic low back pain that encourages the patient to assume an active role in their recovery. Walking has been shown it to be an acceptable type of exercise with a low risk of injury. However, it is not known whether structured physical activity programmes are any more effective than giving advice to remain active.

METHODS/DESIGN: The proposed study will test the feasibility of using a pedometer-driven walking programme, as an adjunct to a standard education and advice session in participants with chronic low back pain. Fifty adult participants will be recruited via a number of different sources. Baseline outcome measures including self reported function; objective physical activity levels; fear-avoidance beliefs and health-related quality of life will be recorded. Eligible participants will be randomly allocated under strict, double blind conditions to one of two treatments groups. Participants in group A will receive a single education and advice session with a physiotherapist based on the content of the 'Back Book'. Participants in group B will receive the same education and advice session. In addition, they will also receive a graded pedometer-driven walking programme prescribed by the physiotherapist. Follow up outcomes will be recorded by the same researcher, who will remain blinded to group allocation, at eight weeks and six months post randomisation. A qualitative exploration of participants' perception of walking will also be examined by use of focus groups at the end of the intervention. As a feasibility study, treatment effects will be represented by point estimates and confidence intervals. The assessment of participant satisfaction will be tabulated, as will adherence levels and any recorded difficulties or adverse events experienced by the participants or therapists. This information will be used to modify the planned interventions to be used in a larger randomised controlled trial.

DISCUSSION: This paper describes the rationale and design of a study which will test the feasibility of using a structured, pedometer-driven walking programme in participants with chronic low back pain.

TRIAL REGISTRATION: [ISRCTN67030896].

Pedometer-driven walking for chronic low back pain:A feasibility randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the feasibility of an RCT of a pedometer-driven walking program and education/advice to remain active compared with education/advice only for treatment of chronic low back pain (CLBP). METHODS: Fifty-seven participants with CLBP recruited from primary care were randomly allocated to either: (1) education/advice (E, n=17) or (2) education/advice plus an 8-week pedometer-driven walking program (EWP, n=40). Step targets, actual daily step counts, and adverse events were recorded in a walking diary over the 8 weeks of intervention for the EWP group only. All other outcomes (eg, functional disability using the Oswestry Disability Questionnaire (ODQ), pain scores, physical activity (PA) measurement etc.) were recorded at baseline, week 9 (immediately post-intervention), and 6 months in both groups. RESULTS: The recruitment rate was 22% and the dropout rate was lower than anticipated (13% to 18% at 6 mo). Adherence with the EWP was high, 93% (n=37/40) walked for =6 weeks, and increased their steps/day [mean absolute increase in steps/d, 2776, 95% confidence interval (CI), 1996-3557] by 59% (95% CI, 40.73%-76.25%) from baseline. Mean percentage adherence with weekly step targets was 70% (95% CI, 62%-77%). Eight (20%) minor-related adverse events were observed in 13% (5/40) of the participants. The EWP group participants demonstrated an 8.2% point improvement [95% CI, -13 to -3.4] on the ODQ at 6 months compared with 1.6% points [95% CI, -9.3 to 6.1) for the E group (between group d=0.44). There was also a larger mean improvement in pain (d=0.4) and a larger increase in PA (d=0.59) at 6 months in EWP. DISCUSSION: This preliminary study demonstrated that a main RCT is feasible. EWP was safe and produced a real increase in walking; CLBP function and pain improved, and participants perceived a greater improvement in their PA levels. These improvements require confirmation in a fully powered RCT.

Physiotherapy for Sleep Disturbance in People With Chronic Low Back Pain:Results of a Feasibility Randomized Controlled Trial

Objective: To determine the feasibility of a randomized controlled trial investigating the effectiveness of physiotherapy for sleep disturbance in chronic low back pain (CLBP) (=12wks). Design: Randomized controlled trial with evaluations at baseline, 3 months, and 6 months. Setting: Outpatient physiotherapy department in an academic teaching hospital. Participants: Participants with CLBP were randomly assigned to a walking program (n=20; mean age ± SD, 46.4±13.8y), supervised exercise class (n=20; mean age ± SD, 41.3±11.9y), or usual physiotherapy (n=20; mean age ± SD, 47.1±14.3y). The 3-month evaluation was completed by 44 participants (73%), and 42 (70%) participants completed the 6-month evaluation. Interventions: Participants received a physiotherapy-delivered 8-week walking program, an 8-week group supervised exercise class (1 class/wk), or 1-to-1 usual physiotherapy (advice, manual therapy, and exercise). Main Outcome Measures: Sleep was assessed by the self-reported Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), Insomnia Severity Index (ISI), Pittsburgh Sleep Diary, and objective actigraphy. Results: Groups were comparable at baseline. Most (95%, n=57) of the participants had sleep disturbance. The acceptability of actigraphy was excellent at baseline (58 of 60 participants), but dropped at 3 months (26 of 44 participants). There were improvements on the PSQI and ISI in all groups at 3 and 6 months, with predominantly medium effect sizes (Cohen d=0.2-0.5). Conclusions: The high prevalence of sleep disturbance indicated the feasibility of good recruitment in future trials. The PSQI would be a suitable screening tool and outcome measure alongside an objective nonobtrusive sleep outcome measure. The effectiveness of physiotherapy for sleep disturbance in CLBP warrants investigation in a fully powered randomized controlled trial. © 2013 American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine.

Different frequencies of acupuncture for treatment for chronic low back pain: an-assessor blinded pilot randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES:
To examine the feasibility of a main RCT to compare the effectiveness of two frequencies (2 versus 5 times/week) of acupuncture treatment for chronic low back pain (LBP).
METHODS:
Participants (n=30) with chronic LBP were randomised into two groups to receive 10 acupuncture treatments: Low Frequency Group, 2 times/week for five weeks (n=15); High Frequency Group, 5 times/week for two weeks (n=15). The following outcomes were measured blindly at baseline, 2 weeks, 5 weeks, 3 months and 1 year: pain on a VAS, functional disability using the RMDQ, quality of life using the Measure Yourself Medical Outcome Profile (MYMOP-2), psychological impact with the Coping Strategies Questionnaire (CSQ) and Pain Locus of Control (PLC) questionnaire. Two objective outcomes, the Shuttle Walk Test (SWT) and Lateral Trunk Flexibility (LTF), were also measured.
RESULTS:
The compliance rate was 100% for each group. Some of the measurements were shown to be sensitive (VAS, RMDQ, MYMOP-2 Wellbeing). 66-330 participants would be required for a fully powered non-inferiority trial. The groups were balanced at baseline for LBP and demographic characteristics. There were no significant differences between the groups in terms of any of the outcomes, at each follow-up time point. It was notable however that the clinically important improvement in terms of pain, functional disability, quality of life, and SWT in both groups was achieved within the first two weeks, which was maintained at one year follow-up.
CONCLUSIONS:
It is feasible to conduct a main RCT, to compare different frequencies of acupuncture for LBP, using sensitive measurements. Also the trend for early clinically important improvement within a minimum of four measurements is worthy of further study.

A review of behaviour change theories and techniques used in group based self-management programmes for chronic low back pain and arthritis

Background: Medical Research Council (MRC) guidelines recommend applying theory within complex interventions to explain how behaviour change occurs. Guidelines endorse self-management of chronic low back pain (CLBP) and osteoarthritis (OA), but evidence for its effectiveness is weak. Objective: This literature review aimed to determine the use of behaviour change theory and techniques within randomised controlled trials of group-based self-management programmes for chronic musculoskeletal pain, specifically CLBP and OA. Methods: A two-phase search strategy of electronic databases was used to identify systematic reviews and studies relevant to this area. Articles were coded for their use of behaviour change theory, and the number of behaviour change techniques (BCTs) was identified using a 93-item taxonomy, Taxonomy (v1). Results: 25 articles of 22 studies met the inclusion criteria, of which only three reported having based their intervention on theory, and all used Social Cognitive Theory. A total of 33 BCTs were coded across all articles with the most commonly identified techniques being '. instruction on how to perform the behaviour', '. demonstration of the behaviour', '. behavioural practice', '. credible source', '. graded tasks' and '. body changes'. Conclusion: Results demonstrate that theoretically driven research within group based self-management programmes for chronic musculoskeletal pain is lacking, or is poorly reported. Future research that follows recommended guidelines regarding the use of theory in study design and reporting is warranted.

A pilot randomised controlled trial (RCT) investigating the effectiveness of reflexology for managing pregnancy low back and/or pelvic pain.

any pregnant women with low back and/or pelvic pain (LBPP) use pain medications to manage this pain, much of which is self-prescribed and potentially harmful. Therefore, there is a need to find effective nonpharmacological treatments for the condition. Reflexology has previously been shown to help nonspecific low back pain. Therefore; a pilot RCT was conducted investigating reflexology in the management of pregnancy-LBPP. 90 primiparous women were randomised to either usual care, a reflexology or footbath intervention. Primary outcome measures were; the Pain Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). 64 women completed the RCT; retention rates for the reflexology group were 80%, usual care group 83.33% and footbath group 50%. The reflexology group demonstrated a Clinically Important Change (CIC) in pain frequency (1.64 cm). Results indicate it is feasible to conduct an RCT in this area, although a footbath is an unsuitable sham treatment. Reflexology may help manage pregnancy-LBPP; however a fully powered trial is needed to confirm this.

A systematic review investigating the effectiveness of Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) for the management of low back and/or pelvic pain (LBPP) in pregnancy

Aim: To evaluate and summarize the current evidence on the effectiveness of complementary and alternative medicine for the management of low back pain and/or pelvic pain in pregnancy.

Background: International research demonstrates that 25-30% of women use complementary and alternative medicine to manage low back and pelvic pain in pregnancy without robust evidence demonstrating its effectiveness.

Design: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials to determine the effectiveness of complementary and alternative medicine for low back and/or pelvic pain in pregnancy.

Data Sources: Cochrane library (1898-2013), PubMed (1996-2013), MEDLINE (1946-2013), AMED (1985-2013), Embase (1974-2013), Cinahl (1937-2013), Index to Thesis (1716-2013) and Ethos (1914-2013).

Review Methods: Selected studies were written in English, randomized controlled trials, a group 1 or 2 therapy and reported pain reduction as an outcome measure. Study quality was reviewed using Risk of Bias and evidence strength the Cochrane Grading of Recommendations and Development Evaluation Tool.

Results: Eight studies were selected for full review. Two acupuncture studies with low risk of bias showed both clinically important changes and statistically significant results. There was evidence of effectiveness for osteopathy and chiropractic. However, osteopathy and chiropractic studies scored high for risk of bias. Strength of the evidence across studies was very low.

Conclusion: There is limited evidence supporting the use of general CAM for managing pregnancy-related low back and/or pelvic pain. However, the restricted availability of high-quality studies, combined with the very low evidence strength, makes it impossible to make evidence-based recommendations for practice.

Supervised walking in comparison with fitness training for chronic back pain in physiotherapy: results of the SWIFT single-blinded randomized controlled trial (ISRCTN17592092)

Effectiveness of brief/minimal contact self-activation interventions that encourage participation in physical activity (PA) for chronic low back pain (CLBP >12 weeks) is unproven. The primary objective of this assessor-blinded randomized controlled trial was to investigate the difference between an individualized walking programme (WP), group exercise class (EC), and usual physiotherapy (UP, control) in mean change in functional disability at 6 months. A sample of 246 participants with CLBP aged 18 to 65 years (79 men and 167 women; mean age ± SD: 45.4 ± 11.4 years) were recruited from 5 outpatient physiotherapy departments in Dublin, Ireland. Consenting participants completed self-report measures of functional disability, pain, quality of life, psychosocial beliefs, and PA were randomly allocated to the WP (n = 82), EC (n = 83), or UP (n = 81) and followed up at 3 (81%; n = 200), 6 (80.1%; n = 197), and 12 months (76.4%; n = 188). Cost diaries were completed at all follow-ups. An intention-to-treat analysis using a mixed between-within repeated-measures analysis of covariance found significant improvements over time on the Oswestry Disability Index (Primary Outcome), the Numerical Rating Scale, Fear Avoidance-PA scale, and the EuroQol EQ-5D-3L Weighted Health Index (P < 0.05), but no significant between-group differences and small between-group effect sizes (WP: mean difference at 6 months, 6.89 Oswestry Disability Index points, 95% confidence interval [CI] -3.64 to -10.15; EC: -5.91, CI: -2.68 to -9.15; UP: -5.09, CI: -1.93 to -8.24). The WP had the lowest mean costs and the highest level of adherence. Supervised walking provides an effective alternative to current forms of CLBP management.