ACE Report Cover
Varying naprapathy & manual therapy combinations similarly effective for neck/back pain
Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report
Lingua
Download Download Download
Scaricare
Cite this Report Cite this Report Cite this Report
Citare
Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites
+ Preferiti
Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report
Lingua
Download Download Download
Scaricare
Cite this Report Cite this Report Cite this Report
Citare
Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites
+ Preferiti
SPINE
Varying naprapathy & manual therapy combinations similarly effective for neck/back pain .
Verified
This report has been verified by one or more authors of the original publication.

OrthoEvidence Journal (OE Journal) - ACE Report

OE Journal. 2016;4(16):20 BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2016 Apr 23;17(1):176

1057 patients with neck and/or back pain were randomized to receive one of the three following treatments: naprapathic manual therapy (NMT), NMT excluding spinal manipulation, or NMT excluding stretching. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the three methods of treatment to determine their comparative efficacy in terms of pain intensity, pain related disability, and perceived recovery after one year. Findings indicated no significant differences in outcomes of NMT, regardless of whether components of the treatment were omitted or not.


Dettagli sul finanziamento della pubblicazione +
Finanziamento:
Non-Industry funded
Sponsor:
Scandinavian College of Naprapathic Manual Medicine, and the Swedish Naprapathic Association
Conflitti:
Other

Rischio di pregiudizio

6,5/10

Criteri di segnalazione

17/20

Indice di fragilità

N/A

Was the allocation sequence adequately generated?

Was allocation adequately concealed?

Blinding Treatment Providers: Was knowledge of the allocated interventions adequately prevented?

Blinding Outcome Assessors: Was knowledge of the allocated interventions adequately prevented?

Blinding Patients: Was knowledge of the allocated interventions adequately prevented?

Was loss to follow-up (missing outcome data) infrequent?

Are reports of the study free of suggestion of selective outcome reporting?

Were outcomes objective, patient-important and assessed in a manner to limit bias (ie. duplicate assessors, Independent assessors)?

Was the sample size sufficiently large to assure a balance of prognosis and sufficiently large number of outcome events?

Was investigator expertise/experience with both treatment and control techniques likely the same (ie.were criteria for surgeon participation/expertise provided)?

Sì = 1

Incerto = 0,5

Non rilevante = 0

No = 0

La valutazione dei criteri di segnalazione valuta la trasparenza con cui gli autori riportano le caratteristiche metodologiche e sperimentali dello studio all'interno della pubblicazione. La valutazione è suddivisa in cinque categorie che vengono presentate di seguito.

4/4

Randomization

2/4

Outcome Measurements

4/4

Inclusion / Exclusion

4/4

Therapy Description

3/4

Statistics

Detsky AS, Naylor CD, O'Rourke K, McGeer AJ, L'Abbé KA. J Clin Epidemiol. 1992;45:255-65

L'Indice di Fragilità è uno strumento che aiuta l'interpretazione dei risultati significativi, fornendo una misura della forza di un risultato. L'Indice di Fragilità rappresenta il numero di eventi consecutivi che devono essere aggiunti a un risultato dicotomico per rendere il risultato non più significativo. Un numero piccolo rappresenta un risultato più debole, mentre un numero grande rappresenta un risultato più forte.

Perché questo studio era necessario ora?

Neck and back pain are common musculoskeletal disorders in the general population and can result in a substantial financial burden. To alleviate costs, manual therapists often perform naprapathic manual therapy (NMT), a combination of therapy modalities such as spinal manipulation, spinal mobilization, stretching, and massage. Previous literature regarding manual therapy for treatment of neck and back pain indicate conflicting evidence, and long-term efficacy is still unclear. Naprapathic manual therapy (NMT) is still a relatively new method of treatment therefore, further evidence is required to provide a conclusive result on its efficacy. The present study evaluates different combinations of manual therapies to determine the optimal combination.

Qual era la domanda di ricerca principale?

In treatment of neck and/or back pain, is there a superior treatment between naprapathy manual therapy (NMT), NMT without spinal manipulation, and NMT without stretching with regards to pain intensity, pain related disabilities, or perceived recovery, as assessed up to 1 year?

Caratteristiche dello studio +
Population:
1057 patients with neck and/or back pain. Eligible patients were 18 to 65 years of age, who had not visited the clinic in the month prior to trial.
Intervention:
Naprapathic manual therapy (NMT) group: Patients received spinal manipulation, spinal mobilization, stretching, and massage therapy. (n=352, 303 completed follow-up; Mean age: 35 +/- 12.2; 68% Female)
Comparison:
NMT excluding spinal manipulation group: Patients received spinal mobilization, stretching, and massage therapy. (n=352, 303 completed follow-up; Mean age: 36 +/- 11.9; 72% Female) NMT excluding stretching group: Patients received spinal manipulation, spinal mobilization, and massage therapy. (n=353, 298 completed follow-up; Mean age: 36 +/- 11.4; 71% Female)
Outcomes:
Primary outcomes consisted of minimal clinically important improvement (MCI) in pain intensity and pain related disability. Secondary outcomes were perceived recovery which was measured with the question, "Which of the following statements is the most consistent with how you feel your problems in the neck/lower back has changed since you joined this study?" and answered with: completely free of pain, considerably improved, slightly improved, no change, slightly worse, and much worse.
Methods:
RCT
Time:
Follow-up periods were at 7, 12, 26, and 52 weeks.
Quali erano i risultati importanti?
  • Minimal clinically important improvement (MCI) in pain intensity were similar when NMT was compared to NMT without spinal manipulation and NMT without stretching at 7, 12, 26, and 52 weeks
  • MCI in pain related disability were similar when NMT was compared to NMT without spinal manipulation and NMT without stretching at 7, 12, 26, and 52 weeks
  • Perceived recovery were similar when NMT was compared to NMT without spinal manipulation and NMT without stretching at 7, 12, 26, and 52 weeks
  • The generalized estimating equations (GEE) conducted found no significant differences in effect between the three treatment arms for MCI in pain intensity (p=0.41, Wald test), and pain related disability (p=0.85, Wald test) at one year follow-up
  • The GEE framework found no significant differences in perceived recovery effects between the three treatment arms (p=0.98, Wald test)
Che cosa devo ricordare di più?

In treatment of neck and/or back pain, naprapathic manual therapy was reported to be similarly effective in minimal clinically important improvement in pain intensity and pain related disability, as well as perceived recovery, regardless of whether spinal manipulation or stretching were excluded from the therapy treatment.

Come influenzerà l'assistenza ai miei pazienti?

The findings of this study suggest that naprapathic manual therapy (NMT) with spinal manipulation, spinal mobilization, stretching, and massage is similarly effective to NMT without spinal manipulation or NMT without stretching. Future studies should include a control group to determine the overall efficacy of naprapathic manual therapy, and experienced senior therapists and implementation of patient-blinding should be utilized for higher-quality evidence.

DISCLAIMER

Il contenuto di questa pagina è solo a scopo informativo e non intende sostituire la consulenza, la diagnosi o il trattamento medico professionale. Se ha bisogno di cure mediche, si rivolga sempre al suo medico o al pronto soccorso più vicino. Le opinioni, le convinzioni e i punti di vista espressi dalle persone sui contenuti presenti in questa pagina non riflettono le opinioni, le convinzioni e i punti di vista di OrthoEvidence.

0 di 4 articoli mensili GRATUITI sbloccati
Ha raggiunto il suo limite di 4 visualizzazioni di articoli gratuiti questo mese

Accesso a OrthoEvidence a soli 1,99 dollari a settimana.

Rimanga in contatto con le ultime prove. Può disdire in qualsiasi momento.
  • Valutazioni critiche dei più recenti studi randomizzati controllati ad alto impatto e delle revisioni sistematiche in ortopedia.
  • Accesso ai contenuti del podcast OrthoEvidence, tra cui collaborazioni con il Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, interviste con chirurghi di fama internazionale e tavole rotonde su notizie e argomenti ortopedici.
  • Abbonamento a The Pulse, una newsletter bisettimanale basata sulle evidenze scientifiche, progettata per aiutarla a prendere decisioni cliniche migliori.
Upgrade
Close Dialog
Bentornato!
Ha dimenticato la password?
Inizi la sua prova gratuita oggi stesso!

Il suo account sarà affiliato a
e includerà l'accesso gratuito a OrthoEvidence


O
Ha dimenticato la password?

O
Controlli la sua e-mail

Se esiste un account con l'indirizzo e-mail fornito, le verrà inviata un'e-mail di reimpostazione della password. Se non vede l'e-mail, controlli la cartella spam o posta indesiderata.

Per ulteriore assistenza, contatti il nostro team di supporto.

Effettui il login per abilitare questa funzione

Per accedere a questa funzione, deve essere collegato ad un account OrthoEvidence attivo. Effettui il login o crei un account di prova GRATUITO.

Tradurre il Rapporto ACE

OrthoEvidence utilizza un servizio di traduzione di terze parti per rendere i contenuti accessibili in più lingue. Si prega di notare che, sebbene venga fatto ogni sforzo per garantire l'accuratezza, le traduzioni potrebbero non essere sempre perfette.

Come citare questo documento ACE Report

OrthoEvidence. Varying naprapathy & manual therapy combinations similarly effective for neck/back pain. OE Journal. 2016;4(16):20. Available from: https://myorthoevidence.com/AceReport/Show/varying-naprapathy-manual-therapy-combinations-similarly-effective-for-neck-back-pain

Copiare la citazione
Effettui il login per abilitare questa funzione

Per accedere a questa funzione, deve essere collegato ad un account OrthoEvidence attivo. Effettui il login o crei un account di prova GRATUITO.

Funzionalità per i membri Premium

Per accedere a questa funzione, deve essere collegato ad un account OrthoEvidence Premium.

Condividi questo articolo ACE Report