Dataset Information

Optimizing treatment protocols for spinal manipulative therapy: study protocol for a randomized trial.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Low back pain is a common and costly condition. Spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) is a treatment supported in some guidelines, although most clinical trials examining SMT report small effect sizes. Enhancing the effects of SMT requires an understanding of underlying mechanisms and a systematic approach to leverage understanding of mechanisms to create more effective treatment protocols that are scalable in clinical practice. Prior work has identified effects on spinal stiffness and lumbar multifidus activation as possible mechanisms. This project represents a refinement phase study within the context of a multi-phase optimization strategy (MOST) framework. Our goal is to identify an optimized SMT treatment protocol by examining the impact of using co-intervention exercise strategies that are proposed to accentuate SMT mechanisms. The optimized protocol can then be evaluated in confirmation phase clinical trials and implementation studies. METHODS:A phased, factorial randomized trial design will be used to evaluate the effects of three intervention components provided in eight combinations on mechanistic (spinal stiffness and multifidus muscle activation) and patient-reported outcomes (pain and disability). All participants will receive two sessions then will be randomly assigned to receive six additional sessions (or no additional treatment) over the next three weeks with factorial combinations of additional SMT and exercise co-interventions (spine mobilizing and multifidus activating). Outcome assessments occur at baseline, and one week, four weeks, and three months after enrollment. Pre-specified analyses will evaluate main effects for treatment components as well as interaction effects. DISCUSSION:Building on preliminary findings identifying possible mechanisms of effects for SMT, this trial represents the next phase in a multiphase strategy towards the ultimate goal of developing an optimized protocol for providing SMT to patients with LBP. If successful, the results of this trial can be tested in future clinical trials in an effort to produce larger treatment benefits and improve patient-centered outcomes for individuals with LBP. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02868034 . Registered on 16 August 2016.

SUBMITTER: Fritz JM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5987587 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Optimizing treatment protocols for spinal manipulative therapy: study protocol for a randomized trial.

Fritz Julie M JM Sharpe Jason A JA Lane Elizabeth E Santillo Doug D Greene Tom T Kawchuk Gregory G

Trials 20180604 1

<h4>Background</h4>Low back pain is a common and costly condition. Spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) is a treatment supported in some guidelines, although most clinical trials examining SMT report small effect sizes. Enhancing the effects of SMT requires an understanding of underlying mechanisms and a systematic approach to leverage understanding of mechanisms to create more effective treatment protocols that are scalable in clinical practice. Prior work has identified effects on spinal stiffnes ...[more]

PMID: 29866131

Similar Datasets

Project description:Cervicogenic headache (CEH) is a secondary headache which affects 1.0-4.6 % of the population. Although the costs are unknown, the health consequences are substantial for the individual; especially considering that they often suffers chronicity. Pharmacological management has no or only minor effect on CEH. Thus, we aim to assess the efficacy of chiropractic spinal manipulative therapy (CSMT) for CEH in a single-blinded placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial (RCT). According to the power calculations, we aim to recruit 120 participants to the RCT. Participants will be randomized into one of three groups; CSMT, placebo (sham manipulation) and control (usual non-manual management). The RCT consists of three stages: 1 month run-in, 3 months intervention and follow-up analyses at the end of intervention and 3, 6 and 12 months. Primary end-point is headache frequency, while headache duration, headache intensity, headache index (frequency × duration × intensity) and medicine consumption are secondary end-points. Primary analysis will assess a change in headache frequency from baseline to the end of intervention and to follow-up, where the groups CSMT and placebo and CSMT and control will be compared. Due to two group-comparisons, the results with p values below 0.025 will be considered statistically significant. For all secondary end-points and analyses, the significance level of 0.05 will be used. The results will be presented with the corresponding p values and 95 % confidence intervals. To our knowledge, this is the first prospective manual therapy three-armed single-blinded placebo-controlled RCT to be conducted for CEH. Current RCTs suggest efficacy in headache frequency, duration and intensity. However a firm conclusion requires clinical single-blinded placebo-controlled RCTs with few methodological shortcomings. The present study design adheres to the recommendations for pharmacological RCTs as far as possible and follows the recommended clinical trial guidelines by the International Headache Society. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01687881, 2 December 2012.

Project description:Neck pain poses enormous individual and societal costs worldwide. Spinal manipulative therapy and Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drug treatment are frequently used despite a lack of compelling efficacy data. This protocol describes a multicentre 4-arm, clinical placebo randomized controlled trial (RCT), investigating the efficacy of chiropractic spinal manipulative therapy (CSMT) versus sham CSMT, ibuprofen, and placebo medicine for acute neck pain. This superiority study will employ parallel groups, featuring a 1:1:1:1 allocation ratio. We will randomize 320 participants equally into four groups: CSMT, sham CSMT, ibuprofen, or placebo medicine. CSMT groups are single-blinded, while the medicine groups are double-blinded. Data will be collected at baseline (Day 0), during treatment and post-treatment. The primary endpoint will assess the difference in mean pain intensity from Day 0 to Day 14 on a numeric rating scale 0-10; the CSMT group is compared to sham CSMT, ibuprofen, and placebo medicine groups, respectively. Secondary endpoints will assess mean pain intensity and mean duration at different time points, and adverse events, blinding success, and treatment satisfaction, including comparison between ibuprofen and placebo medicine. Power calculation is based on a mean neck pain rating of 5 at Day 0, with standard deviation of 1 in all groups. Mean pain reduction at Day 14 is expected to be 60% in the CSMT group, 40% in sham CSMT and ibuprofen groups, and 20% in the placebo medicine group. A linear mixed model will compare the mean values for groups with corresponding 95% confidence intervals. P values below 0.017 will be considered statistically significant. All analyses will be conducted blinded from group allocation. This RCT aims towards the highest research standards possible for manual-therapy RCTs owing to its two placebo arms. If CSMT and/or ibuprofen proves to be effective, it will provide evidence-based support for CSMT and/or ibuprofen for acute neck pain. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05374057. EU Clinical Trials Register: EudraCT number: 2021-005483-21.

Project description:BackgroundSpinal manipulative therapy is commonly used in the treatment of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Some therapists also rely on physiotherapeutic scoliosis-specific exercise (PSSE). Combining these two modalities seems reasonable, but the effectiveness of this combination has never been rigorously tested. Here, a protocol for a pilot study is proposed to determine the feasibility of conducting a larger randomized trial. The pilot study was designed to test the hypothesis that spinal manipulative therapy followed by PSSE is more effective than PSSE alone in improving the Cobb angle, sensorimotor integration, the angle of trunk rotation (ATR), body symmetry, and quality of life.MethodsThe protocol describes a randomized controlled pilot trial with 40 subjects divided into study and control groups. Both groups will receive 8 weeks of PSSE, but the study group will also receive spinal manipulative therapy during the first 2 weeks before PSSE. The primary outcome will be an estimate of the feasibility of conducting a full-scale experiment. The influencing factors will be the time to complete enrollment, the recruitment rate, subject retention, and adherence to the treatment allocations. The secondary outcomes that will be used to assess the efficacy of treatment will include the Cobb angle, somatosensory evoked potentials, ATR, three-dimensional postural parameters, and scores on the 22-item Scoliosis Research Society outcomes questionnaire. The Cobb angle will be measured at baseline and at the end of 8 weeks of training. The somatosensory evoked potentials will be measured at baseline and at the end of 2 weeks of training. The ATR, three-dimensional postural parameters, and scores on the 22-item Scoliosis Research Society outcomes questionnaire will be measured at baseline and at 2 weeks, 4 weeks, and 8 weeks of treatment.DiscussionThis study will inform the design of a future full-scale trial. The outcomes will provide preliminary data about the efficacy of the combination of spinal manipulative therapy and exercise in treating scoliosis.Trial registrationProspectively registered at Chinese clinical trial registry, ChiCTR1900027037 . Registered on 29 October 2019. http://www.chictr.org.cn/edit.aspx?pid=44954&htm=4.

Project description:Background:Low back pain (LBP) is a common disabling condition in older adults which often limits physical function and diminishes quality of life. Two clinical trials in older adults have shown spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) results in similar or small improvements relative to medical care; however, the effectiveness of adding SMT or rehabilitative exercise to home exercise is unclear. Methods:We conducted a randomized clinical trial assessing the comparative effectiveness of adding SMT or supervised rehabilitative exercise to home exercise in adults 65 or older with sub-acute or chronic LBP. Treatments were provided over 12-weeks and self-report outcomes were collected at 4, 12, 26, and 52 weeks. The primary outcome was pain severity. Secondary outcomes included back disability, health status, medication use, satisfaction with care, and global improvement. Linear mixed models were used to analyze outcomes. The primary analysis included longitudinal outcomes in the short (week 4-12) and long-term (week 4-52). An omnibus test assessing differences across all groups over the year was used to control for multiplicity. Secondary analyses included outcomes at each time point and responder analyses. This study was funded by the US Department of Health and Human Services, Health Resources and Services Administration. Results:241 participants were randomized and 230 (95%) provided complete primary outcome data. The primary analysis showed group differences in pain over the one-year were small and not statistically significant. Pain severity was reduced by 30 to 40% after treatment in all 3 groups with the largest difference (eight percentage points) favoring SMT and home exercise over home exercise alone. Group differences at other time points ranged from 0 to 6 percentage points with no consistent pattern favoring one treatment. One-year post-treatment pain reductions diminished in all three groups. Secondary self-report outcomes followed a similar pattern with no important group differences, except satisfaction with care, where the two combination groups were consistently superior to home exercise alone. Conclusions:Adding spinal manipulation or supervised rehabilitative exercise to home exercise alone does not appear to improve pain or disability in the short- or long-term for older adults with chronic low back pain, but did enhance satisfaction with care. Trial registration:NCT00269321.

Project description:BackgroundRecent evidence proved the necessity to improve health care and pain management in newborns. Osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) has been largely used to treat painful syndromes as well as term and preterm newborns. Recent studies have demonstrated positive results of osteopathy in reducing length of stay and costs. However, no trials were carried out on pain in newborns. The aim of the present clinical trial is to explore the effectiveness of osteopathic treatment in reducing pain in a sample of preterms.Methods/designA three-armed single blinded placebo-control randomised controlled trial protocol has been designed to primarily evaluate the extent to which OMT is effective in reducing pain in preterms. One hundred and twenty newborns will be enrolled from one tertiary neonatal intensive care unit in central Italy and randomised in three groups: study, sham and control. The study group will be further prospectively randomised in two subgroups: experienced osteopaths and students. All preterms will receive standard medical care. Osteopathic treatment will be applied to the study group only whilst 'soft touch' will be administer to the sham group only. Newborns will undergo manual sessions once a week for the entire period of hospitalisation. Blinding will be assured for neonatal staff and outcome assessor. Primary outcome will be the mean difference in baseline score changes of PIPP questionnaire between discharge and entry among the three groups. Secondary outcomes will be: mean difference in length of stay and costs between groups. Statistical analyses will use per-protocol analysis method. Missing data will be handled using last observation carried forward imputation technique.DiscussionThe present single blinded randomised controlled trial has been designed to explore potential advantages of OMT in the management of newborns' pain. Currently, based on a patient-centred need-based approach, this research will be looking at the benefit of osteopathic care rather than the efficacy of a specific technique or a pre-determined protocol.Trial registrationThe protocol has been registered on ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT02146677 ) on 20 May 2014.

Project description:Background:In children, spinal pain is transitory for most, but up to 20% experience recurrent and bothersome complaints. It is generally acknowledged that interventions may be more effective for subgroups of those affected with low back pain. In this secondary analysis of data from a randomized clinical trial, we tested whether five indicators of a potential increased need for treatment might act as effect modifiers for manipulative therapy in the treatment of spinal pain in children. We hypothesized that the most severely affected children would benefit more from manipulative therapy. Method:This study was a secondary analysis of data from a randomised controlled trial comparing advice, exercises and soft tissue treatment with and without the addition of manipulative therapy in 238 Danish school children aged 9-15 years complaining of spinal pain. A text message system (SMS) and clinical examinations were used for data collection (February 2012 to April 2014).Five pre-specified potential effect modifiers were explored: Number of weeks with spinal pain 6 months prior to inclusion, number of weeks with co-occurring musculoskeletal pain 6 months prior to inclusion, expectations of the clinical course, pain intensity, and quality of life.Outcomes were number of recurrences of spinal pain, number of weeks with pain, length of episodes, global perceived effect, and change in pain intensity. To explore potential effect modification, various types of regression models were used depending on the type of outcome, including interaction tests. Results:We found that children with long duration of spinal pain or co-occurring musculoskeletal pain prior to inclusion as well as low quality of life at baseline tended to benefit from manipulative therapy over non-manipulative therapy, whereas the opposite was seen for children reporting high intensity of pain. However, most results were statistically insignificant. Conclusions:This secondary analysis indicates that children more effected by certain baseline characteristics, but not pain intensity, have a greater chance to benefit from treatment that include manipulative therapy. However, these analyses were both secondary and underpowered, and therefore merely exploratory. The results underline the need for a careful choice of inclusion criteria in future investigations of manipulative therapy in children. Trial registration:NCT01504698; results.

Dataset Information

Optimizing treatment protocols for spinal manipulative therapy: study protocol for a randomized trial.

Publications

Optimizing treatment protocols for spinal manipulative therapy: study protocol for a randomized trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets