The effects of osteopathic manipulative treatment on pain and disability in patients with chronic low back pain: a single-blinded randomized controlled trial.

IF 1.4 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Journal of Osteopathic Medicine Pub Date : 2024-01-11 eCollection Date: 2024-05-01 DOI:10.1515/jom-2022-0124
John M Popovich, Jacek Cholewicki, N Peter Reeves, Lisa A DeStefano, Jacob J Rowan, Timothy J Francisco, Lawrence L Prokop, Mathew A Zatkin, Angela S Lee, Alla Sikorskii, Pramod K Pathak, Jongeun Choi, Clark J Radcliffe, Ahmed Ramadan
{"title":"The effects of osteopathic manipulative treatment on pain and disability in patients with chronic low back pain: a single-blinded randomized controlled trial.","authors":"John M Popovich, Jacek Cholewicki, N Peter Reeves, Lisa A DeStefano, Jacob J Rowan, Timothy J Francisco, Lawrence L Prokop, Mathew A Zatkin, Angela S Lee, Alla Sikorskii, Pramod K Pathak, Jongeun Choi, Clark J Radcliffe, Ahmed Ramadan","doi":"10.1515/jom-2022-0124","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Context: </strong>The evidence for the efficacy of osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) in the management of low back pain (LBP) is considered weak by systematic reviews, because it is generally based on low-quality studies. Consequently, there is a need for more randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with a low risk of bias.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The objective of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of an OMT intervention for reducing pain and disability in patients with chronic LBP.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A single-blinded, crossover, RCT was conducted at a university-based health system. Participants were adults, 21-65 years old, with nonspecific LBP. Eligible participants (n=80) were randomized to two trial arms: an immediate OMT intervention group and a delayed OMT (waiting period) group. The intervention consisted of three to four OMT sessions over 4-6 weeks, after which the participants switched (crossed-over) groups. The primary clinical outcomes were average pain, current pain, Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) 29 v1.0 pain interference and physical function, and modified Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). Secondary outcomes included the remaining PROMIS health domains and the Fear Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire (FABQ). These measures were taken at baseline (T<sub>0</sub>), after one OMT session (T<sub>1</sub>), at the crossover point (T<sub>2</sub>), and at the end of the trial (T<sub>3</sub>). Due to the carryover effects of OMT intervention, only the outcomes obtained prior to T<sub>2</sub> were evaluated utilizing mixed-effects models and after adjusting for baseline values.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Totals of 35 and 36 participants with chronic LBP were available for the analysis at T<sub>1</sub> in the immediate OMT and waiting period groups, respectively, whereas 31 and 33 participants were available for the analysis at T<sub>2</sub> in the immediate OMT and waiting period groups, respectively. After one session of OMT (T<sub>1</sub>), the analysis showed a significant reduction in the secondary outcomes of sleep disturbance and anxiety compared to the waiting period group. Following the entire intervention period (T<sub>2</sub>), the immediate OMT group demonstrated a significantly better average pain outcome. The effect size was a 0.8 standard deviation (SD), rendering the reduction in pain clinically significant. Further, the improvement in anxiety remained statistically significant. No study-related serious adverse events (AEs) were reported.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>OMT intervention is safe and effective in reducing pain along with improving sleep and anxiety profiles in patients with chronic LBP.</p>","PeriodicalId":36050,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Osteopathic Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"219-230"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Osteopathic Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/jom-2022-0124","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Context: The evidence for the efficacy of osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) in the management of low back pain (LBP) is considered weak by systematic reviews, because it is generally based on low-quality studies. Consequently, there is a need for more randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with a low risk of bias.

Objectives: The objective of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of an OMT intervention for reducing pain and disability in patients with chronic LBP.

Methods: A single-blinded, crossover, RCT was conducted at a university-based health system. Participants were adults, 21-65 years old, with nonspecific LBP. Eligible participants (n=80) were randomized to two trial arms: an immediate OMT intervention group and a delayed OMT (waiting period) group. The intervention consisted of three to four OMT sessions over 4-6 weeks, after which the participants switched (crossed-over) groups. The primary clinical outcomes were average pain, current pain, Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) 29 v1.0 pain interference and physical function, and modified Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). Secondary outcomes included the remaining PROMIS health domains and the Fear Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire (FABQ). These measures were taken at baseline (T0), after one OMT session (T1), at the crossover point (T2), and at the end of the trial (T3). Due to the carryover effects of OMT intervention, only the outcomes obtained prior to T2 were evaluated utilizing mixed-effects models and after adjusting for baseline values.

Results: Totals of 35 and 36 participants with chronic LBP were available for the analysis at T1 in the immediate OMT and waiting period groups, respectively, whereas 31 and 33 participants were available for the analysis at T2 in the immediate OMT and waiting period groups, respectively. After one session of OMT (T1), the analysis showed a significant reduction in the secondary outcomes of sleep disturbance and anxiety compared to the waiting period group. Following the entire intervention period (T2), the immediate OMT group demonstrated a significantly better average pain outcome. The effect size was a 0.8 standard deviation (SD), rendering the reduction in pain clinically significant. Further, the improvement in anxiety remained statistically significant. No study-related serious adverse events (AEs) were reported.

Conclusions: OMT intervention is safe and effective in reducing pain along with improving sleep and anxiety profiles in patients with chronic LBP.

整骨疗法对慢性腰背痛患者疼痛和残疾的影响:单盲随机对照试验。
背景:系统综述认为,整骨疗法(OMT)治疗腰背痛(LBP)的疗效证据不足,因为这些证据一般都是基于低质量的研究。因此,需要更多低偏倚风险的随机对照试验(RCT):本研究旨在评估OMT干预对减轻慢性腰椎间盘突出症患者疼痛和残疾的疗效:方法:在一所大学的医疗系统中开展了一项单盲、交叉、RCT 研究。参与者为年龄在 21-65 岁之间、患有非特异性腰椎间盘突出症的成年人。符合条件的参与者(80 人)被随机分配到两个试验组:即刻 OMT 干预组和延迟 OMT(等待期)组。干预措施包括在 4-6 周内进行三到四次 OMT 治疗,之后参与者交换(交叉)组别。主要临床结果包括平均疼痛、当前疼痛、患者报告结果测量信息系统(PROMIS)29 v1.0疼痛干扰和身体功能以及修正的Oswestry残疾指数(ODI)。次要结果包括 PROMIS 其余健康领域和恐惧避免信念问卷 (FABQ)。这些测量分别在基线(T0)、一次 OMT 治疗后(T1)、交叉点(T2)和试验结束时(T3)进行。由于 OMT 干预的带入效应,只对 T2 之前的结果进行了评估,评估采用了混合效应模型,并对基线值进行了调整:在 T1 阶段,立即接受 OMT 治疗组和等待期治疗组分别有 35 名和 36 名慢性腰椎间盘突出症患者可供分析,而在 T2 阶段,立即接受 OMT 治疗组和等待期治疗组分别有 31 名和 33 名患者可供分析。经过一个疗程的局部治疗(T1)后,分析结果显示,与等待期组相比,睡眠障碍和焦虑等次要结果显著减少。在整个干预期(T2)后,立即进行局部治疗组的平均疼痛疗效显著优于等待期组。效应大小为 0.8 标准差(SD),因此疼痛的减轻具有临床意义。此外,焦虑症的改善仍具有统计学意义。没有与研究相关的严重不良事件(AEs)报告:OMT干预在减轻慢性腰椎间盘突出症患者疼痛、改善睡眠和焦虑状况方面安全有效。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Osteopathic Medicine
Journal of Osteopathic Medicine Health Professions-Complementary and Manual Therapy
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
13.30%
发文量
118
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信