Mirzaei Ashani Hamideh, Pourahmadi Mohammadreza, Ayoubpour Mohamad Reza, Dadgoo Mehdi, Sarrafzadeh Javad, Firouze Bahare
Rehabilitation Research Center, Department of Physiotherapy, School of Rehabilitation Sciences, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Department of Radiology, Rasoul-e-Akram Hospital, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Adv Biomed Res. 2025 Aug 26;14:80. doi: 10.4103/abr.abr_318_23. eCollection 2025.
Low back pain (LBP) is a socioeconomic burden worldwide and a major contributor to healthcare costs. Mobilization and dry needling (DN) are well-known treatments for LBP, and both of them, as a part of treatment, can relieve LBP. Due to the importance of choosing interventions with greater effects on patients' recovery, in this study we intend to compare DN and lumbar spine mobilization, as complementary therapies in combination with routine physiotherapy in the treatment of patients with chronic nonspecific LBP (CNLBP).
The study is a two-arm randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, controlled trial comparing DN to lumbar spine mobilization in individuals (n = 56; 18-45 years of age) with CNLBP. The experimental group will receive DN plus sham mobilization, and the control group will receive Maitland mobilization plus sham DN (eight treatment sessions in 4 weeks). The primary outcome is functional disability, and the secondary outcomes are pain, lumbar multifidus (LM) and quadratus lumborum (QL) function, lumbar range of motion (ROM), pain pressure threshold (PPT).
The results of this protocol study provide information on the comparison between the effects of two complementary therapies, DN and mobilization, in people with chronic nonspecific LBP.
In this study, we intend to solve the methodological problems of the previous study in this field. The results of this study allow the therapist to choose an intervention that may have more therapeutic effects in combination with routine physiotherapy in the treatment of CNLBP.
腰痛是全球范围内的社会经济负担,也是医疗费用的主要构成因素。松动术和干针疗法是治疗腰痛的知名方法,二者作为治疗的一部分均可缓解腰痛。鉴于选择对患者康复效果更佳的干预措施的重要性,在本研究中,我们打算比较干针疗法和腰椎松动术,作为辅助疗法与常规物理治疗相结合,用于治疗慢性非特异性腰痛(CNLBP)患者。
本研究为双臂随机、双盲、双模拟、对照试验,比较干针疗法与腰椎松动术对患有CNLBP的个体(n = 56;年龄18 - 45岁)的疗效。实验组将接受干针疗法加假松动术,对照组将接受麦特兰德松动术加假干针疗法(4周内进行8次治疗)。主要结局指标为功能障碍,次要结局指标为疼痛、腰大肌(LM)和腰方肌(QL)功能、腰椎活动度(ROM)、疼痛压力阈值(PPT)。
本方案研究的结果提供了关于干针疗法和松动术这两种辅助疗法对慢性非特异性腰痛患者疗效比较的信息。
在本研究中,我们打算解决该领域先前研究的方法学问题。本研究结果使治疗师能够选择一种在与常规物理治疗相结合治疗CNLBP时可能具有更大治疗效果的干预措施。
1)ClinicalTrials.gov(NCT05214456)和2)IRCT.ir(IRCT20210706051802N1)。