Comparative effectiveness of Chuna manual therapy versus conventional usual care for non-acute low back pain: a pilot randomized controlled trial

Autor: Koh-Woon Kim, Jae-Heung Cho, Kyeong-Tae Lim, Jae-Young Jung, Min ho Lee A, Me-riong Kim, In-Hyuk Ha, Byung-Cheul Shin, Eui-Hyoung Hwang, Nam-Kwen Kim, Junhwan Lee, Kibong Nam
Rok vydání: 2019
Předmět:
Zdroj: Trials, Vol 20, Iss 1, Pp 1-8 (2019)
Trials
ISSN: 1745-6215
DOI: 10.1186/s13063-019-3302-y
Popis: Background Low back pain (LBP) is common, with a lifetime prevalence of 80%, and as such it places substantial social and economic burden on individuals and society. Chuna manual therapy (CMT) combines aspects of physiology, biodynamics of spine and joint motion, and basic theory of movement dynamics. This study aimed to test the comparative effectiveness and safety of CMT for non-acute LBP. Methods A three-arm, multicenter, pragmatic, randomized controlled pilot trial was conducted from 28 March 2016 to 19 September 2016, at four medical institutions. A total of 60 patients were randomly allocated to the CMT group (n = 20), usual care (UC) group (n = 20), or combined treatment (CMT + UC) group (n = 20), and received the relevant treatments for 6 weeks. The primary outcome was a numeric rating scale (NRS) representation of LBP intensity, while secondary outcomes included NRS of leg pain, Oswestry disability index (ODI), Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC), the EuroQol-5 dimensions (EQ-5D), lumbar range of motion, and safety. Results A total of 60 patients were included in the intention-to-treat analysis and 55 patients (CMT, 18; UC, 18; CMT + UC, 19) were included in the per-protocol analysis (drop-out rate 5.3%). Over the treatment period there were significant differences in the NRS score for LBP (CMT mean − 3.28 (95% CI − 4.08, − 2.47); UC − 1.95 (− 2.82, − 1.08); CMT + UC − 1.75 (− 2.70, − 0.80), P
Databáze: OpenAIRE
Externí odkaz: