SPINE
Three combinations of manual therapy techniques within naprapathy in the treatment of neck and/or back pain: a randomized controlled trial
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):1761057 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.
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)?
はい = 1
不確実＝0.5
無関係 = 0
いいえ = 0
報告基準評価では、著者が出版物内で試験の方法論的特徴や試験特性を報告する際の透明性を評価します。評価は以下の5つのカテゴリーに分類されます。
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
Fragility Indexは、重要な所見の解釈を助けるツールで、結果の強さの尺度を提供します。Fragility Indexは、その所見が有意でなくなるために、二項対立の結果に追加する必要がある連続した事象の数を表します。数値が小さいほど弱い所見を表し、数値が大きいほど強い所見を表します。
なぜ今この研究が必要なのですか？
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.
主な研究課題は何ですか？
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?
重要な知見は？
- 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)
最も覚えておくべきことは？
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.
それが私の患者ケアにどのように影響するか？
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.
免責事項
このページに記載されている内容は、情報提供のみを目的としたものであり、専門的な医療アドバイス、診断、治療の代わりとなるものではありません。治療が必要な場合は、必ず医師の診断を仰ぐか、最寄りの救急外来を受診してください。このページに記載されている内容に関して個人が表明した意見、信念、見解は、OrthoEvidenceの意見、信念、見解を反映するものではありません。
0の4 月間無料記事のロック解除
