Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics
Volume 28, Issue 5 , Pages 312-322, June 2005

Does Clinician Treatment Choice Improve the Outcomes of Manual Therapy for Nonspecific Low Back Pain? A Metaanalysis

  • Peter Kent, GradDip(ManipPhysio)

      Affiliations

    • Private practice, and PhD candidate in the School of Physiotherapy, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
    • Corresponding Author InformationSubmit requests for reprints to: Peter Kent, GradDip(ManipPhysio), School of Physiotherapy, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Victoria 3086, Australia
  • ,
  • Darryn Marks, MManipPhysio

      Affiliations

    • Consultant Physiotherapist, Barnsley District General Hospital, Barnsley, South Yorkshire, UK
  • ,
  • Warrick Pearson, MManipPhysio

      Affiliations

    • Private practice, Apsendale/Edithvale Physiotherapy, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
  • ,
  • Jenny Keating, PhD

      Affiliations

    • Senior lecturer, School of Physiotherapy, La Trobe University, Victoria, Australia

Received 8 April 2004; received in revised form 8 August 2004

Objective

The purpose of this study is to quantitatively compare outcomes for trials when treating clinicians did, or did not, have the discretion to decide on treatment technique.

Methods

CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, the Physiotherapy Evidence Database, the Cochrane Controlled Trials register, reference list searching, and citation tracking were investigated. Ten randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of mobilization and manipulation for nonspecific low back pain (NSLBP) met the inclusion criteria. The effectiveness of manual therapy with and without clinician technique choice was assessed using descriptive statistics and metaanalysis for the outcomes of pain and activity limitation.

Results

In approximately two thirds of the included RCTs, clinicians had choice of treatment technique. There were no systematic differences favoring results for RCTs that did allow clinician choice of treatment technique.

Conclusions

Few quality studies are available, and conclusions on the basis of these data need to be interpreted with caution. However, allowing clinicians to choose from a number of treatment techniques does not appear to have improved the outcomes of these RCTs that have investigated the effect of manual therapy for NSLBP. If tailoring manual therapy treatment to NSLBP patients does positively impact on patient outcomes, this is not yet systematically apparent [J Manipulative Physiol Ther 28 (2005), 000-000].

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 15.00 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

 This study was supported by Faculty of Health Sciences (La Trobe University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia), Joint Coal Board Health and Safety Trust (Australia), and the Musculoskeletal Physiotherapy Association (Victoria). No benefits in any form have been, or will be, received from a commercial party related directly or indirectly to the subject of the manuscript.

PII: S0161-4754(05)00109-0

doi:10.1016/j.jmpt.2005.04.009

Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics
Volume 28, Issue 5 , Pages 312-322, June 2005