Hemmilä H M, Keinänen-Kiukaanniemi S M, Levoska S, Puska P
Folk Medicine Centre, Kaustines, Finland.
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1997 Jun;78(6):571-7. doi: 10.1016/s0003-9993(97)90420-2.
To determine whether traditional bone-setting or continuous light exercise therapy could case back pain and improve function better than ordinary physiotherapy.
Observer-blinded, randomized clinical trial with a 6-month follow-up.
An outpatient institution for folk medicine research.
Of 147 back pain patients recruited from local health centers and by newspaper announcements, 132 were found eligible (non-retired-no contraindications to manipulation) and entered. A final 114 (one dropout) with back pain for longer than 7 weeks were included in this intent to treat analysis.
Bone-setting, guidance for continuous light back movements or physiotherapy for up to ten 1-hour sessions during 6 weeks.
Spinal mobility and muscular performance. Back pain assessed by visual analog scales (VAS).
The physical measures changed only modestly, from one tenth to half of standard deviation, while the VAS was halved. The thoracolumbar side-bending, the modified Schober, and the VAS were significantly better improved by bone-setting than by exercise but not better than by physiotherapy.
Neither bone-setting nor exercise differed significantly from physiotherapy, but bone-setting improved lateral and forward bending of the spine and back pain more than did exercise.
确定传统正骨疗法或持续轻度运动疗法在缓解背痛和改善功能方面是否比普通物理治疗效果更好。
观察者盲法随机临床试验，随访6个月。
一家民间医学研究门诊机构。
从当地健康中心和通过报纸公告招募的147名背痛患者中，132名符合条件（未退休且无手法治疗禁忌症）并纳入研究。最终，114名（1名退出）背痛超过7周的患者被纳入本意向性分析。
正骨疗法、指导持续轻度背部运动或物理治疗，为期6周，共十次，每次1小时。
脊柱活动度和肌肉性能。采用视觉模拟量表（VAS）评估背痛情况。
身体指标仅有适度变化，从标准差的十分之一到一半，而VAS评分减半。与运动疗法相比，正骨疗法在改善胸腰椎侧屈、改良Schober试验结果和VAS评分方面更显著，但不比物理治疗更好。
正骨疗法和运动疗法与物理治疗相比均无显著差异，但正骨疗法在改善脊柱侧屈和前屈以及背痛方面比运动疗法更有效。
