Index to Chiropractic Literature
Index to Chiropractic Literature
My ICL     Sign In
Tuesday, October 23, 2018
Index to Chiropractic LiteratureIndex to Chiropractic LiteratureIndex to Chiropractic Literature
Share:

ICL Home


For best results switch to Advanced Search. More search tips.
Article Detail
Return to Search Results
ID 20580
Title A randomized controlled trial comparing 2 types of spinal manipulation and minimal conservative medical care for adults 55 years and older with subacute or chronic low back pain [randomized controlled trial]
URL http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19539115
Journal J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2009 Jun;32(5):330-343
Author(s)
Subject(s)
Peer Review Yes
Publication Type Randomized Controlled Trial
Abstract/Notes Objective: Chiropractic care is used by many older patients for low back pain (LBP), but there are no published results of randomized trials examining spinal manipulation (SM) for older adults. The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of 2 biomechanically distinct forms of SM and minimal conservative medical care (MCMC) for participants at least 55 years old with subacute or chronic nonradicular LBP.

Methods: Randomized controlled trial. The primary outcome variable was low back-related disability assessed with the 24-item Roland Morris Disability questionnaire at 3, 6, 12, and 24 weeks. Participants were randomly allocated to 6 weeks of care including 12 visits of either high-velocity, low-amplitude (HVLA)-SM, low-velocity, variable-amplitude (LVVA)-SM, or 3 visits of MCMC.

Results: Two hundred forty participants (105 women and 135 men) ages 63.1 ± 6.7 years without significant comorbidities. Adjusted mean Roland Morris Disability change scores (95% confidence intervals) from baseline to the end of active care were 2.9 (2.2, 3.6) and 2.7 (2.0, 3.3) in the LVVA-SM and HVLA-SM groups, respectively, and 1.6 (0.5, 2.8) in the MCMC group. There were no significant differences between LVVA-SM and HVLA-SM at any of the end points. The LVVA-SM group had significant improvements in mean functional status ranging from 1.3 to 2.2 points over the MCMC group. There were no serious adverse events associated with any of the interventions.

Conclusions: Biomechanically distinct forms of SM did not lead to different outcomes in older LBP patients and both SM procedures were associated with small yet clinically important changes in functional status by the end of treatment for this relatively healthy older population. Participants who received either form of SM had improvements on average in functional status ranging from 1 to 2.2 over those who received MCMC. From an evidence-based care perspective, patient preference and clinical experience should drive how clinicians and patients make the SM procedure decision for this patient population.

This abstract is reproduced with the permission of the publisher. Click on the above link for the PubMed record for this article; full text by subscription. Select a publisher from PubMed's Links>Linkout


      Text (Citation) Tagged (Export) Excel
 
Email To
Subject
 Message
Format
HTML Text     Excel



Search Tips
 
Enclose phrases in quotation marks.  Example: The search  "low back pain" Côté retrieves articles on low back pain AND author Côté.
Retrieve all forms of a word with an asterisk*; also called a wildcard or truncation. Examples: chiropract* retrieves chiropractic, chiropractor, chiropractors; injur* retrieves injury, injured, injuries
Register an account in My ICL to save search histories (My Searches) and collections of records (My Collections).  For best results switch to Advanced Search
~ More search tips: My ICL & Advanced Search ~