OBJECTIVE: Spinal manual therapy (SMT) is often used to treat patients with spinal disorders; however, the underlying mechanisms of SMT are not fully understood. This systematic review and meta-analysis investigates the effect of SMT compared with sham treatment or no intervention on local or remote (segmental or non-segmental) pressure pain thresholds (PPTs) in patients with chronic musculoskeletal conditions and people who are pain free.
METHODS: A systematic search was conducted in the PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and CINAHL databases. Randomized controlled trials investigating the effect of SMT on PPTs in patients with chronic musculoskeletal conditions and in people who were pain free were included. Quality assessment and evidence synthesis were performed according to Cochrane Handbook recommendations. A meta-analysis was performed using standardized mean difference and 95% CIs.
RESULTS: Twenty-two reports were included in the present review. There were no significant results for an immediate effect of SMT on local (low certainty of evidence), remote (segmental) (low certainty of evidence), and remote (non-segmental) (low certainty of evidence) PPTs in patients with chronic pain as well as on local (moderate certainty of evidence) and remote (segmental) (low certainty of evidence) PPTs in people who were pain free. A small but significant effect (standardized mean difference = 0.26; 95% CI = 0.01 to 0.51; low certainty of evidence) was observed on remote (non-segmental) PPTs in people who were pain free, which was not considered a meaningful effect size.
CONCLUSION: No immediate, consistent, or meaningful hypoalgetic effect of SMT was shown on PPTs on various body areas. Involvement of spinal or supraspinal underlying mechanisms were, therefore, not confirmed via PPTs but should still be investigated using methods designed to assess central nervous pain processing.
IMPACT: No consistent and meaningful hypoalgesic effects of spinal manual therapy were demonstrated on PPTs in participants who were pain free and in patients with chronic musculoskeletal disorders.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness of acupuncture for non-specific low back pain (NSLBP) through systematic review of published randomised controlled trials (RCTs).
METHODS: Studies were identified in electronic databases from their inception to February 2018, and were grouped according to the control interventions. The outcomes of interest were pain intensity and disability. Methodological quality was evaluated using the Cochrane risk-of-bias criteria and the Standards for Reporting Interventions in Controlled Trials of Acupuncture (STRICTA) checklist. The review was reported according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines.
RESULTS: 25 trials (n=7587 participants) were identified and included in a meta-analysis. The results showed that acupuncture was more effective at inducing pain relief than: no treatment (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.69, 95% CI -0.99 to -0.38); sham acupuncture in the immediate term (SMD -0.33, 95% CI -0.49 to -0.18), short term (SMD -0.47, 95% CI -0.77 to -0.17), and intermediate term (SMD -0.17, 95% CI -0.28 to -0.05); and usual care in the short term (SMD -1.07, 95% CI -1.81 to -0.33) and intermediate term (SMD -0.43, 95% CI -0.77 to -0.10). Also, adjunctive acupuncture with usual care was more effective than usual care alone at all time points studied. With regard to functional improvement, the analysis showed a significant difference between acupuncture and no treatment (SMD -0.94, 95% CI -1.57 to -0.30), whereas the other control therapies could not be assessed.
CONCLUSION: We draw a cautious conclusion that acupuncture appears to be effective for NSLBP and that acupuncture may be an important supplement to usual care in the management of NSLBP.
OBJECTIVES: Many interventions are available to manage chronic pain; understanding the durability of treatment effects may assist with treatment selection. We sought to assess which noninvasive nonpharmacological treatments for selected chronic pain conditions are associated with persistent improvement in function and pain outcomes at least 1 month after the completion of treatment.
DATA SOURCES: Electronic databases (Ovid MEDLINE®, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews) through November 2017, reference lists, and ClinicalTrials.gov.
REVIEW METHODS: Using predefined criteria, we selected randomized controlled trials of noninvasive nonpharmacological treatments for five common chronic pain conditions (chronic low back pain; chronic neck pain; osteoarthritis of the knee, hip, or hand; fibromyalgia; and tension headache) that addressed efficacy or harms compared with usual care, no treatment, waitlist, placebo, or sham intervention; compared with pharmacological therapy; or compared with exercise. Study quality was assessed, data extracted, and results summarized for function and pain. Only trials reporting results for at least 1 month post-intervention were included. We focused on the persistence of effects at short term (1 to <6 months following treatment completion), intermediate term (≥6 to <12 months), and long term (≥12 months).
RESULTS: Two hundred eighteen publications (202 trials) were included. Many included trials were small. Evidence on outcomes beyond 1 year after treatment completion was sparse. Most trials enrolled patients with moderate baseline pain intensity (e.g., >5 on a 0 to 10 point numeric rating scale) and duration of symptoms ranging from 3 months to >15 years. The most common comparison was against usual care. Chronic low back pain: At short term, massage, yoga, and psychological therapies (primarily CBT) (strength of evidence [SOE]: moderate) and exercise, acupuncture, spinal manipulation, and multidisciplinary rehabilitation (SOE: low) were associated with slight improvements in function compared with usual care or inactive controls. Except for spinal manipulation, these interventions also improved pain. Effects on intermediate-term function were sustained for yoga, spinal manipulation, multidisciplinary rehabilitation (SOE: low), and psychological therapies (SOE: moderate). Improvements in pain continued into intermediate term for exercise, massage, and yoga (moderate effect, SOE: low); mindfulness-based stress reduction (small effect, SOE: low); spinal manipulation, psychological therapies, and multidisciplinary rehabilitation (small effects, SOE: moderate). For acupuncture, there was no difference in pain at intermediate term, but a slight improvement at long term (SOE: low). Psychological therapies were associated with slightly greater improvement than usual care or an attention control on both function and pain at short-term, intermediate-term, and long-term followup (SOE: moderate). At short and intermediate term, multidisciplinary rehabilitation slightly improved pain compared with exercise (SOE: moderate). High-intensity multidisciplinary rehabilitation (≥20 hours/week or >80 hours total) was not clearly better than non–high-intensity programs. Chronic neck pain: At short and intermediate terms, acupuncture and Alexander Technique were associated with slightly improved function compared with usual care (both interventions), sham acupuncture, or sham laser (SOE: low), but no improvement in pain was seen at any time (SOE: llow). Short-term low-level laser therapy was associated with moderate improvement in function and pain (SOE: moderate). Combination exercise (any 3 of the following: muscle performance, mobility, muscle re-education, aerobic) demonstrated a slight improvement in pain and function short and long term (SOE: low). Osteoarthritis: For knee osteoarthritis, exercise and ultrasound demonstrated small short-term improvements in function compared with usual care, an attention control, or sham procedure (SOE: moderate for exercise, low for ultrasound), which persisted into the intermediate term only for exercise (SOE: low). Exercise was also associated with moderate improvement in pain (SOE: low). Long term, the small improvement in function seen with exercise persisted, but there was no clear effect on pain (SOE: low). Evidence was sparse on interventions for hip and hand osteoarthritis . Exercise for hip osteoarthritis was associated with slightly greater function and pain improvement than usual care short term (SOE: low). The effect on function was sustained intermediate term (SOE: low). Fibromyalgia: In the short term, acupuncture (SOE: moderate), CBT, tai chi, qigong, and exercise (SOE: low) were associated with slight improvements in function compared with an attention control, sham, no treatment, or usual care. Exercise (SOE: moderate) and CBT improved pain slightly, and tai chi and qigong (SOE: low) improved pain moderately in the short term. At intermediate term for exercise (SOE: moderate), acupuncture, and CBT (SOE: low), slight functional improvements persisted; they were also seen for myofascial release massage and multidisciplinary rehabilitation (SOE: low); pain was improved slightly with multidisciplinary rehabilitation in the intermediate term (SOE: low). In the long term, small improvements in function continued for multidisciplinary rehabilitation but not for exercise or massage (SOE: low for all); massage (SOE: low) improved long-term pain slightly, but no clear impact on pain for exercise (SOE: moderate) or multidisciplinary rehabilitation (SOE: low) was seen. Short-term CBT was associated with a slight improvement in function but not pain compared with pregabalin. Chronic tension headache: Evidence was sparse and the majority of trials were of poor quality. Spinal manipulation slightly improved function and moderately improved pain short term versus usual care, and laser acupuncture was associated with slight pain improvement short term compared with sham (SOE: low). There was no evidence suggesting increased risk for serious treatment-related harms for any of the interventions, although data on harms were limited.
CONCLUSIONS: Exercise, multidisciplinary rehabilitation, acupuncture, CBT, and mind-body practices were most consistently associated with durable slight to moderate improvements in function and pain for specific chronic pain conditions. Our findings provided some support for clinical strategies that focused on use of nonpharmacological therapies for specific chronic pain conditions. Additional comparative research on sustainability of effects beyond the immediate post-treatment period is needed, particularly for conditions other than low back pain.
Objectives The aim of this network meta-analysis is to assess the effectiveness of therapeutic strategies for patients with radiculopathy, including physical, medical, surgical, and other therapies. Methods We electronically searched electronic databases including PubMed and Embase for randomized controlled trials. The response rate and visual analog scale of pain change were considered as primary outcomes. The outcomes were measured by odds ratio (OR) value and corresponding 95% credible intervals (CrIs) or standardized mean difference (MD) with 95% CrIs. Besides, surface under cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) were performed to rank efficacy and safety of treatments on each end points. Results A total of 16 eligible studies with 1071 subjects were included in this analysis. Our results showed that corticosteroid was significantly more effective than control regarding the response rate (OR = 3.86, 95% CrI: 1.16, 12.55). Surgery had a better performance in pain change compared with control (MD = -1.92, 95% CrI: -3.58, -0.15). According to the SUCRA results, corticosteroid, collar, and physiotherapy ranked the highest concerning response rate (SUCRA = 0.656, 0.652, and 0.610, respectively). Surgery, traction, and corticosteroid were superior to others in pain change (SUCRA = 0.866, 0.748, and 0.589, respectively). Conclusion According to the network meta-analysis result, we recommended surgery as the optimal treatment for radiculopathy patients; traction and corticosteroids were also recommended for their beneficial interventions.
Complementary medicine therapies are frequently used to treat pain conditions such as headaches and neck, back, and joint pain. Chronic pain, described as pain lasting longer than 3-6 months, can be a debilitating condition that has a significant socioeconomic impact. Pharmacologic approaches are often used for alleviating chronic pain, but recently there has been a reluctance to prescribe opioids for chronic noncancer pain because of concerns about tolerance, dependence, and addiction. As a result, there has been increased interest in integrative medicine strategies to help manage pain and to reduce reliance on prescription opioids to manage pain. This article offers a brief critical review of integrative medical therapies used to treat chronic pain, including nutritional supplements, yoga, relaxation, tai chi, massage, spinal manipulation, and acupuncture. The goal of this article is to identify those treatments that show evidence of efficacy and to identify gaps in the literature where additional studies and controlled trials are needed. An electronic search of the databases of PubMed, The Cochrane Library, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and Science Citation Index Expanded was conducted. Overall, weak positive evidence was found for yoga, relaxation, tai chi, massage, and manipulation. Strong evidence for acupuncture as a complementary treatment for chronic pain that has been shown to decrease the usage of opioids was found. Few studies were found in which integrative medicine approaches were used to address opioid misuse and abuse among chronic pain patients. Additional controlled trials to address the use of integrative medicine approaches in pain management are needed.
BACKGROUND CONTEXT: In 2008, the lack of published evidence prevented the Bone and Joint Decade 2000-2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and Its Associated Disorders (Neck Pain Task Force [NPTF]) from commenting on the effectiveness of psychological interventions for the management of neck pain.
PURPOSE: This study aimed to update findings of the NPTF and evaluate the effectiveness of psychological interventions for the management of neck pain and associated disorders (NAD) or whiplash-associated disorders (WAD).
STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: This study used systematic review and best-evidence synthesis.
SAMPLE: Randomized controlled trials, cohort studies, and case-control studies comparing psychological interventions to other non-invasive interventions or no intervention were the samples used in this study.
OUTCOME MEASURES: The outcome measures are (1) self-rated recovery; (2) functional recovery; (3) clinical outcomes; (4) administrative outcomes; and (5) adverse effects.
METHODS: We searched six databases from 1990 to 2015. Randomized controlled trials, cohort studies, and case-control studies meeting our selection criteria were eligible for critical appraisal. Random pairs of independent reviewers used the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network criteria to critically appraise eligible studies. Studies with a low risk of bias were synthesized following best evidence synthesis principles. This study was funded by the Ontario Ministry of Finance.
RESULTS: We screened 1,919 articles, 19 were eligible for critical appraisal and 10 were judged to have low risk of bias. We found no clear evidence supporting relaxation training or cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) for persistent grades I-III NAD for reducing pain intensity or disability. Similarly, we did not find evidence to support the effectiveness of biofeedback or relaxation training for persistent grade II WAD, and there is conflicting evidence for the use of CBT in this population. However, adding a progressive goal attainment program to functional restoration physiotherapy may benefit patients with persistent grades I-III WAD. Furthermore, Jyoti meditation may help reduce neck pain intensity and bothersomeness in patients with persistent NAD.
CONCLUSIONS: We did not find evidence for or against the use of psychological interventions in patients with recent onset NAD or WAD. We found evidence that a progressive goal attainment program may be helpful for the management of persistent WAD and that Jyoti meditation may benefit patients with persistent NAD. The limited evidence of effectiveness for psychological interventions may be due to several factors, such as interventions that are ineffective, poorly conceptualized, or poorly implemented. Further methodologically rigorous research is needed.
BACKGROUND CONTEXT: In 2008, the Bone and Joint Decade 2000-2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and its Associated Disorders (Neck Pain Task Force) found limited evidence on the effectiveness of manual therapies, passive physical modalities, or acupuncture for the management of whiplash-associated disorders (WAD) or neck pain and associated disorders (NAD).
PURPOSE: To update findings of the Neck Pain Task Force examining the effectiveness of manual therapies, passive physical modalities, and acupuncture for the management of WAD or NAD.
STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Systematic review and best evidence synthesis.
SAMPLE: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), cohort studies, case-control studies comparing manual therapies, passive physical modalities, or acupuncture to other interventions, placebo/sham, or no intervention.
OUTCOME MEASURES: Self-rated or functional recovery, pain intensity, health-related quality of life, psychological outcomes, or adverse events.
METHODS: We systematically searched five databases from 2000 to 2014. Random pairs of independent reviewers critically appraised eligible studies using the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) criteria. Studies with a low risk of bias were stratified by the intervention's stage of development (exploratory versus evaluation) and synthesized following best evidence synthesis principles. Funding was provided by the Ministry of Finance.
RESULTS: We screened 8551 citations, 38 studies were relevant, and 22 had a low risk of bias. Evidence from seven exploratory studies suggests that: 1) for recent but not persistent NAD I-II: thoracic manipulation offers short-term benefits; 2) for persistent NAD I-II: technical parameters of cervical mobilization (e.g., direction or site of manual contact) do not impact outcomes, while one session of cervical manipulation is similar to Kinesiotaping; and 3) for NAD I-II: strain-counterstrain treatment is no better than placebo. Evidence from 15 evaluation studies suggests that: 1) for recent NAD I-II: cervical and thoracic manipulation provides no additional benefit to high-dose supervised exercises; Swedish/clinical massage adds benefit to self-care advice; 2) for persistent NAD I-II: home-based cupping massage has similar outcomes to home-based muscle relaxation; low-level laser therapy (LLLT) does not offer benefits; Western acupuncture provides similar outcomes to non-penetrating placebo electroacupuncture; needle acupuncture provides similar outcomes to sham-penetrating acupuncture; 3) for WAD I-II: needle electroacupuncture offers similar outcomes as simulated electroacupuncture; and 4) for recent NAD III: a semi-rigid cervical collar with rest and graded strengthening exercises lead to similar outcomes; LLLT does not offer benefits.
CONCLUSIONS: Our review adds new evidence to the Neck Pain Task Force and suggests that mobilization, manipulation, and clinical massage are effective interventions for the management of neck pain. It also suggests that electroacupuncture, strain-counterstrain, relaxation massage, and some passive physical modalities (heat, cold, diathermy, hydrotherapy, ultrasound) are not effective and should not be used to manage neck pain.
Objectives: In nerve-related chronic musculoskeletal (MS) disorders, neural tissue management is used to relieve pain by balancing the relative movement of neural tissues and their surrounding tissues. To date, there has not been any review evaluating the magnitude of this treatment effect in nerve-related chronic MS pain. The aim of this review was to compare pain and disability in individuals with nerve-related chronic MS pain who were treated with neural tissue management with those who received minimal or other treatment approaches. Methods: Searches of 8 major electronic databases were conducted, and data on pain and disability scores were extracted. Meta-analyses (where possible) with either a fixed-effect(s) or random-effects) model, standardized mean differences (SMDs), and tests of heterogeneity were performed. Results: Twenty clinically controlled trials were identified and included in the meta-analyses. When compared with minimal intervention, neural mobilization provided superior pain relief (pooled SMD = -0.77; 95% confidence interval [CI], -1.11 to - 0.42; P < 0.0001), and reduction in disability (pooled SMD = - 1.06; 95% CI, - 1.97 to -0.14; P = 0.02), after post hoc sensitivity analyses. No significant differences were found when comparing neural mobilization with other treatment approaches for pain (pooled SMD = -0.67; 95% CI, -2.03 to 0.69; P = 0.33), after post hoc sensitivity analysis, and disability (pooled SMD = - 0.03; 95% CI, -0.54 to 0.59; P = 0.93). Discussion: Neural tissue management is superior to minimal intervention for pain relief and reduction of disability in nerve-related chronic MS pain. Existing evidence does not establish superiority of neural mobilization over other forms of intervention in reducing pain and disability in individuals with nerve-related chronic MS pain.
BACKGROUND CONTEXT: In 2008, the Neck Pain Task Force (NPTF) recommended exercise for the management of neck pain and whiplash-associated disorders (WAD). However, no evidence was available on the effectiveness of exercise for Grade III neck pain or WAD. Moreover, limited evidence was available to contrast the effectiveness of various types of exercises.
PURPOSE: To update the findings of the NPTF on the effectiveness of exercise for the management of neck pain and WAD grades I to III.
STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Systematic review and best evidence synthesis.
SAMPLE: Studies comparing the effectiveness of exercise to other conservative interventions or no intervention.
OUTCOME MEASURES: Outcomes of interest included self-rated recovery, functional recovery, pain intensity, health-related quality of life, psychological outcomes, and/or adverse events.
METHODS: We searched eight electronic databases from 2000 to 2013. Eligible studies were critically appraised using the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network criteria. The results of scientifically admissible studies were synthesized following best-evidence synthesis principles.
RESULTS: We retrieved 4,761 articles, and 21 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were critically appraised. Ten RCTs were scientifically admissible: nine investigated neck pain and one addressed WAD. For the management of recent neck pain Grade I/II, unsupervised range-of-motion exercises, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and acetaminophen, or manual therapy lead to similar outcomes. For recent neck pain Grade III, supervised graded strengthening is more effective than advice but leads to similar short-term outcomes as a cervical collar. For persistent neck pain and WAD Grade I/II, supervised qigong and combined strengthening, range-of-motion, and flexibility exercises are more effective than wait list. Additionally, supervised Iyengar yoga is more effective than home exercise. Finally, supervised high-dose strengthening is not superior to home exercises or advice.
CONCLUSIONS: We found evidence that supervised qigong, Iyengar yoga, and combined programs including strengthening, range of motion, and flexibility are effective for the management of persistent neck pain. We did not find evidence that one supervised exercise program is superior to another. Overall, most studies reported small effect sizes suggesting that a small clinical effect can be expected with the use of exercise alone.
Spinal manual therapy (SMT) is often used to treat patients with spinal disorders; however, the underlying mechanisms of SMT are not fully understood. This systematic review and meta-analysis investigates the effect of SMT compared with sham treatment or no intervention on local or remote (segmental or non-segmental) pressure pain thresholds (PPTs) in patients with chronic musculoskeletal conditions and people who are pain free.
METHODS:
A systematic search was conducted in the PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and CINAHL databases. Randomized controlled trials investigating the effect of SMT on PPTs in patients with chronic musculoskeletal conditions and in people who were pain free were included. Quality assessment and evidence synthesis were performed according to Cochrane Handbook recommendations. A meta-analysis was performed using standardized mean difference and 95% CIs.
RESULTS:
Twenty-two reports were included in the present review. There were no significant results for an immediate effect of SMT on local (low certainty of evidence), remote (segmental) (low certainty of evidence), and remote (non-segmental) (low certainty of evidence) PPTs in patients with chronic pain as well as on local (moderate certainty of evidence) and remote (segmental) (low certainty of evidence) PPTs in people who were pain free. A small but significant effect (standardized mean difference = 0.26; 95% CI = 0.01 to 0.51; low certainty of evidence) was observed on remote (non-segmental) PPTs in people who were pain free, which was not considered a meaningful effect size.
CONCLUSION:
No immediate, consistent, or meaningful hypoalgetic effect of SMT was shown on PPTs on various body areas. Involvement of spinal or supraspinal underlying mechanisms were, therefore, not confirmed via PPTs but should still be investigated using methods designed to assess central nervous pain processing.
IMPACT:
No consistent and meaningful hypoalgesic effects of spinal manual therapy were demonstrated on PPTs in participants who were pain free and in patients with chronic musculoskeletal disorders.
