| Added et al.1515 Added MAN, Costa LOP, De Freitas DG, Fukuda TY, Monteiro RL, Salomão EC, etal. Kinesio taping does not provide additional benefits in patients with chronic low back pain who receive exercise and manual therapy: A randomized controlled trial. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2016;46(7):506-13.
|
To compare the effect of Kinesio Tapingwith manual therapy (Maitland Concept) in patients with low back pain |
Reductions in pain and disability and an increase in perceived improvement were observed among the groups.
At 6 months, there were differences in disability among the groups in the therapy group.
|
In patients with low back pain treated with manual therapy (Maitland Concept), the application of Kinesio Taping did not produce additional improvement of pain or disability in chronic low back pain. |
| Ali et al.1616 Ali MdN, Sethi K, Noohu MM. Comparison of two mobilization techniques in management of chronic non-specific low back pain. J Bodyw Mov Ther. 2019;23(4):918-23.
|
To compare Maitland (manual therapy) posteroanterior (PA) mobilization with the sustained glides (SNAG) of the Mulligan Concept (manual therapy) in patients with chronic low back pain |
In both the Maitland and Mulligan technique groups,significant improvements in pain, range of motion, paraspinal muscle activity, and disability were observed. |
The Maitland Concept and Mulligantechniques produced improvements in subjects with chronic low back pain. The application of manual therapy (PA mobilizations and sustained glides) improve pain, range of motion, muscle activity, and disability in patients with chronic low back pain. |
| Alt et al.1717 Alt A, Malcherek N, Geisler S, Thietje R. The sustainable effectiveness to avoid chronification in non-specific, non-chronic back pain. Dtsch Z Sportmed. 2020;71(4):97-102.
|
To determine the most effective and sustainable strategy to reduce and avoid the chronification of low back pain |
Significant results in NPRS (4a p=0.002, 5a p=0.001) and ODI (4a p=0.001, 5a p=0.000) were observed in the exercise group in weeks 6 and 16. |
Manual therapy combined with exercise is more effective in improving chronicity in people with low back pain. |
| Bade et al.1818 Bade M, Cobo Estevez M, Neeley D, Pandya J, Gunderson T, Cook C. Effects of manual therapy and exercise targeting the hips in patients with low-back pain-A randomized controlled trial. J Eval Clin Pract. 2017;23(4):734-40.
|
To assess the effectiveness of a protocolof exercises and manual therapy on the hip to improve symptoms in patient with low back pain |
Significant results were obtainedin the groups for ODI (p=0.03), NPRS (p=0.02), GRoC (p<0.01), and patient satisfaction (p<0.01). These results were more favorable in the LBP+ HIP group. |
Direct manual therapy of the hip combined with exercise reduces pain anddisability, and improves patient satisfaction. |
| De Oliveira et al.1919 de Oliveira RF, Costa LOP, Nascimento LP, Rissato LL. Directed vertebral manipulation is not better than generic vertebral manipulation in patients with chronic low back pain: a randomised trial. J Physiother. 2020;66(3):174-9.
|
To evaluate the effect of thoracolumbar manipulations on pain |
Both groups had a reduction in pain, however the changes were not clinically relevant. |
No differences in pain were observed in people with chronic low back pain when manipulation was applied to the symptomatic segment or when applied to a thoracic level (asymptomatic). |
| Donaldson et al.2020 Donaldson M, Petersen S, Cook C, Learman K. A Prescriptively Selected Nonthrust Manipulation Versus a Therapist-Selected Nonthrust Manipulation for Treatment of Individuals With Low Back Pain: A Randomized Clinical Trial. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2016;46(4):243-50.
|
To examine the effects of manipulation or mobilization in subjects with low back pain |
There were significant results in the GRoC scores (p<0.01) for the mobilization selected by the physical therapist. |
Both techniques reduced the pain and the disability, but mobilization has better results in the long term. |
| Ferreira et al.2121 Ferreira M da G e. S, de Mèlo LC, de Mendonça HCS, de Amorim Cabral KD, Rodrigues FTM, Nascimento LSG do, etal. Maitland in chronic lumbar pain of young adults improves pain and functionality. Man Ther Posturology Rehabil J. 2017:1-7.
|
To assess the efficacy of the Maitland method in reducing pain and improving functionality in students |
The control group had significant differences in the RMQ (T1 p= 0.026, T2 p= 0.018) and in the VAS (T1 p= 0.018, T2 p=0.017).The intervention group presented better mobility (p=0.001). |
Both the Maitland method and exercise are effective in reducing pain and improving functionality. |
| Fosberg et al.2222 Fosberg KK, Puentedura E, Schmitz B, Jain TK, Cleland JA. The Effects of Thrust Joint Manipulation on the Resting and Contraction Thickness of Transversus Abdominis in Patients With Low Back Pain: A Randomized Control Trial. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2020;43(4):339-55.
|
To observe whether changes in the thickness of the transversus abdominis are produced after applying a manipulation in patients with low back pain |
No significant results relative to the thickness of the transversus abdominis were observed. At 48 hours, changes to the FABQ-PA (p=0.028) and NPRS (p=0.047) were obtained. |
Manipulation did not influence a change in the thickness of the transversus abdominis in patients with low back pain. |
| Griswold et al.2323 Griswold D, Gargano F, Learman KE. A randomized clinical trial comparing non-thrust manipulation with segmental and distal dry needling on pain, disability, and rate of recovery for patients with non-specific low back pain. J Man Manip Ther. 2019;27(3):141-51.
|
To compare the effects of dry needling with those of mobilization in patients with nonspecific low back pain |
There were differences in the PSFS (p=0.018), ODI (p=0.015),and NPRS (p=0.009) in each group. |
Mobilization and dry needling both independently improved pain, disability, and the perception of recovery of patients with nonspecific low back pain. Either of the techniques can be considered physical therapy treatment for nonspecific low back pain. |
| Kamali et al.2424 Kamali F, Zamanlou M, Ghanbari A, Alipour A, Bervis S. Comparison of manipulation and stabilization exercises in patients with sacroiliac joint dysfunction patients: A randomized clinical trial. J Bodyw Mov Ther. 2019;23(1):177-82.
|
To compare the effects of manual therapy and exercises on pain and disability in patients with low back pain and sacroiliac dysfunction. |
There were improvements in pain (p=0.0001) and in the ODI scale (p=0.0001) in both groups. |
Manual therapy and stabilization exercises improved the pain and disability of patients with sacroiliac dysfunction. |
| Krekoukias et al.2525 Krekoukias G, Kalidoni V, Stekas I, Paras G, Gkouzioti K. Effect of manual posterior to anterior mobilization on cervical dysfunction and pain levels: A clinical trial. Epitheorese Klin Farmakol Kai Farmakokinetikes. 2019;37(1):57-65.
|
To analyze the efficacy of lumbar mobilization in subjects with low back pain and degeneration |
Significant results were obtained in the manual therapy group and the control group (p=0.001) for pain, disability, and satisfaction, while in the simulated group there were no differences. |
Mobilization is effective for this type of subject, but even more so when combined with exercise. |
| Louw et al.2626 Louw A, Farrell K, Landers M, Barclay M, Goodman E, Gillund J, etal. The effect of manual therapy and neuroplasticity education on chronic low back pain: a randomized clinical trial. J Man Manip Ther. 2017;25(5):227-34.
|
To analyze whether the explication of neuroplasticity is superior to the traditional biomechanical explanation in patients who receive PA mobilizations |
There were significant leg elevation results in the experimental group (p=0.001). |
The explanation of neuroplasticity,as compared to that of biomechanics, resulted in a measurable difference in the SLR in patients with low back pain. |
| Mehyar et al.2727 Mehyar F, Santos M, Wilson SE, Staggs VS, Sharma NK. Effect of grade III lumbar mobilization on back muscles in chronic low back pain: A randomized controlled trial. J Allied Health. 2020;49(1):20-8.
|
To analyze the effect of mobilization onerector and multifidus muscle activity in people with low back pain |
The mobilization caused greater contraction of the multifidi (p=0.003) in people with moderate low back pain, and in the EMG of the erectors for L1 (p=0.01) and L4 (p=0.05) in those with severe pain. |
Mobilization reduces the activity of the erectors and increases the contraction of the multifidi. |
| Shah y Kage2828 Shah SG, Kage V. Effect of seven sessions of posterior-to-anterior spinal mobilisation versus prone press-ups in non-specific low back pain-randomized clinical trial. J Clin Diagn Res. 2016;10(3):YC10-3.
|
To analyze the effect of mobilization and flexion in prone decubitus in patients with low back pain. |
Both interventions were significant in terms of pain and ROM (p <0.05), though the PA mobilization proved to be superior. |
Both PA mobilization and flexion are effective in nonspecific low back pain. |
| Teychenne et al.2929 Teychenne M, Lamb KE, Main L, Miller C, Hahne A, Ford J, etal. General strength and conditioning versus motor control with manual therapy for improving depressive symptoms in chronic low back pain: A randomised feasibility trial. PloS One. 2019;14(8):e0220442.
|
Viability of the protocols used for back pain in improving depressive symptoms in low back pain |
There was a small reduction (p= 0.02) in the depressive symptoms. |
Both therapies produced a reduction in the depressive symptoms in people with low back pain. |
Thumbnail
