Moderators of the Effect of Spinal Manipulative Therapy on Pain Relief and Function in Patients with Chronic Low Back Pain
Open Access
- 11 November 2020
- journal article
- review article
- Published by Wolters Kluwer Health in Spine
- Vol. 46 (8) , E505-E517
Abstract
Study Design.: Individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis. Objective.: The aim of this study was to identify which participant characteristics moderate the effect of spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) on pain and functioning in chronic LBP. Summary of Background.: The effects of SMT are comparable to other interventions recommended in guidelines for chronic low back pain (LBP); however, it is unclear which patients are more likely to benefit from SMT compared to other therapies. Methods.: IPD were requested from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) examining the effect of SMT in adults with chronic LBP for pain and function compared to various other therapies (stratified by comparison). Potential patient moderators (n = 23) were a priori based on their clinical relevance. We investigated each moderator using a one-stage approach with IPD and investigated this interaction with the intervention for each time point (1, 3, 6, and 12 months). Results.: We received IPD from 21 of 46 RCTs (n = 4223). The majority (12 RCTs, n = 2249) compared SMT to recommended interventions. The duration of LBP, baseline pain (confirmatory), smoking, and previous exposure to SMT (exploratory) had a small moderating effect across outcomes and follow-up points; these estimates did not represent minimally relevant differences in effects; for example, patients with versus recommended therapy for the outcome pain (mean differences ranged from 4.97 (95% confidence interval, CI: −3.20 to 13.13) at 3 months, 10.76 (95% CI: 1.06 to 20.47) at 6 months to 5.26 (95% CI: –2.92 to 13.44) at 12 months in patients with over a year LBP. No other moderators demonstrated a consistent pattern across time and outcomes. Few moderator analyses were conducted for the other comparisons because of too few data. Conclusion.: We did not identify any moderators that enable clinicians to identify which patients are likely to benefit more from SMT compared to other treatments. Level of Evidence: 2Keywords
This publication has 54 references indexed in Scilit:
- Manual therapy followed by specific active exercises versus a placebo followed by specific active exercises on the improvement of functional disability in patients with chronic non specific low back pain: a randomized controlled trialBMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, 2012
- Supervised exercise, spinal manipulation, and home exercise for chronic low back pain: a randomized clinical trialThe Spine Journal, 2011
- Spinal manipulative therapy for chronic low-back painCochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2011
- Methodological criteria for the assessment of moderators in systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials: a consensus studyBMC Medical Research Methodology, 2011
- Spinal manipulation compared with back school and with individually delivered physiotherapy for the treatment of chronic low back pain: a randomized trial with one-year follow-upClinical Rehabilitation, 2010
- 2009 Updated Method Guidelines for Systematic Reviews in the Cochrane Back Review GroupSpine, 2009
- Estimating the number needed to treat from continuous outcomes in randomised controlled trials: methodological challenges and worked example using data from the UK Back Pain Exercise and Manipulation (BEAM) trialBMC Medical Research Methodology, 2009
- Effectiveness of traditional bone setting in treating chronic low back pain: A randomised pilot trialComplementary Therapies in Medicine, 2009
- A Comparison Between Chiropractic Management and Pain Clinic Management for Chronic Low-Back Pain in a National Health Service Outpatient ClinicThe Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine, 2008
- United Kingdom back pain exercise and manipulation (UK BEAM) randomised trial: effectiveness of physical treatments for back pain in primary careBMJ, 2004