Lumbar discopathy is a painful pathology, which needs conservative treatment to relieve symptoms. The aim of this study was to compare the effect of Kaltenborn-Evjenth Orthopedic Manual Therapy (KEOMT) and Kinesiotherapy (KIN) on quality of life, and pain in patients with lumbar discopathy. The study was designed as a pilot randomized controlled trial with concealed allocation, assessor blinding, and intention-to-treat analysis. Eighty participants, 40-70 years old suffering from lumbar discopathy were randomized to an experimental (KEOMT) and a control (KIN) groups. Both groups completed 10 treatments for 5 weeks. All evaluations were performed at baseline (Week 0), and after the treatment (Week 5) for: quality of life (Short Form-36 questionnaire – SF-36), and pain (visual analog scale − VAS). After the intervention the statistical significant between group differences favoring the KEOMT were fund in the SF-36 with regard to physical function (p = 0.027), role physical (p = 0.004), bodily pain (p = 0.027), general health (p = 0.018), vitality (p = 0.019), social functioning (p = 0.034), role emotional (p = 0.028), mental health (p = 0.015), and on VAS (p = 0.014). It was concluded that patients achieve better health benefits caused by KEOMT.
Published in | Rehabilitation Science (Volume 2, Issue 1) |
DOI | 10.11648/j.rs.20170201.12 |
Page(s) | 6-11 |
Creative Commons |
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited. |
Copyright |
Copyright © The Author(s), 2017. Published by Science Publishing Group |
Kaltenborn-Evjenth Orthopedic Manual Therapy, Kinesiotherapy, Lumbar Discopathy
[1] | Croft PR, Macfarlane GJ, Papageorgiou AC, Thomas E, Silman AJ. Outcome of low back pain in general practice: a prospective study. British Medical Journal. 1998; 316, 7141: p. 1356-1359. |
[2] | Hoy D, March L, Brooks P, Woolf A, Blyth F, Vos T, et al. Measuring the global burden of low back pain. Best Practice & Research Clinical Rheumatology. 2010; 24, 2: p. 155-165. |
[3] | Murray CJ, Lopez AD. Measuring the global burden of disease. The New England Journal of Medicine. 2013; 369, 5: p. 448-457. |
[4] | Woo SD, Kim TH. The effects of lumbar stabilization exercise with thoracis extension exercise on lumbosacral alignment and the low back pain disability index in patients with chronic low back pain. Journal of Physical Therapy Science. 2016; 28, 2: p. 680-684. |
[5] | Ribeiro IA, de Oliveira TD, Blois CR. Effects of Pilates and Classical Kinesiotherapy on chronic low back pain: a case study. Physiotherapy in Motion. 2015; 28, 4: p. 759-765. |
[6] | Dehghan M, Farahbod F. The Efficacy of Thermotherapy and Cryotherapy on Pain Relief in Patients with Acute Low Back Pain, A Clinical Trial Study. Journal of Clinical Diagnostic Research. 2014; 8, 9: p. LC01-LC04. |
[7] | Djavid GE, Mehrdad R, Ghasemi M, Hasan-Zadeh H, Sotoodeh-Manesh A, Pouryaghoub G. In chronic low back pain, low level laser therapy combined with exercise is more beneficial than exercise alone in the long term: a randomised trial. The Australian Journal of Physiotherapy. 2007; 53, 3: p. 155-160. |
[8] | Hanscom DA, Brox JI, Bunnage R. Defining the Role of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy in Treating Chronic Low Back Pain: An Overview. Global Spine Journal. 2015; 5, 6: p. 496-504. |
[9] | Celikoglu E, Kiraz I, Is M, Cecen A, Ramazanoğlu AF. The surgical treatment of far lateral lumbar disc herniation: 33 cases. Acta Orthopaedica Belgica. 2014; 80, 4: p. 468-476. |
[10] | Rubinstein SM, Terwee CB, Assendelft WJ, de Boer MR, van Tulder MW. Spinal manipulative therapy for acute low-back pain. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2012; 9: p. CD008880. |
[11] | Goertz CM, Long CR, Hondras MA, Petri R, Delgado R, Lawrence DJ, et al. Adding chiropractic manipulative therapy to standard medical care for patients with acute low back pain: results of a pragmatic randomized comparative effectiveness study. The Spine Journal (Phila Pa 1976). 2013; 38, 8: p. 627-634. |
[12] | von Heymann WJ, Schloemer P, Timm J, Muehlbauer B. Spinal high-velocity low amplitude manipulation in acute nonspecific low back pain: a double-blinded randomized controlled trial in comparison with diclofenac and placebo. The Spine Journal (Phila Pa 1976). 2013; 38, 7: p. 540-548. |
[13] | Shekelle PG, Adams AH, Chassin MR, Hurwitz EL, Brook RH. Spinal manipulation for low-back pain. Annals of Internal Medicine. 1992; 117, 7: p. 590-598. |
[14] | Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D; CONSORT Group. CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. International Journal of Surgery. 2011; 9, 8: p. 672-678. |
[15] | Lins L, Carvalho FM. SF-36 total score as a single measure of health-related quality of life: Scoping review. SAGE Open Medicine. 2016; 4: 1-12. |
[16] | Araujo IL, Castro MC, Daltro C, Matos MA. Quality of Life and Functional Independence in Patients with Osteoarthritis of the Knee. Knee Surgery & Related Research. 2016; 28, 3: p. 219-224. |
[17] | Cohen J. A power primer. Psychological Bulletin. 1992; 112, 1: p. 155-159. |
[18] | Choi J, Hwangbo G, Park J, Lee S. The Effects of Manual Therapy Using Joint Mobilization and Flexion-distraction Techniques on Chronic Low Back Pain and Disc Heights. Journal of Physical Therapy Science. 2014; 26, 8: p. 1259-1262. |
[19] | Park SE, Wang JS. Effect of joint mobilization using KEOMT and PNF on a patient with CLBP and a lumbar transitional vertebra: a case study. Journal of Physical Therapy Science. 2015; 27, 5: p. 1629-1632. |
[20] | Ko TS, Jung HB, Kim JA. The effects of thoracic mobilization on pain, disability index and spinal mobility in chronic low back pain patients. Journal of Special Education and Rehabilitation Science. 2009; 48: p. 115-137. |
[21] | López de Celis C, Barra ME, Villar E, Vallero C, Fernández Jentsch G, Tricás JM. Effectiveness of the posteroanterior mobilization in the lumbar raquis with the Kaltenborn wedge in chronic low back pain patients. Physiotherapy. 2007; 29: p. 261-269. |
[22] | Donchin M, Woolf O, Kaplan L, Floman Y. Secondary prevention of low-back pain: a clinical trial. The Spine Journal. 1990; 15, 12: p. 1317-1320. |
[23] | McGill. SM. Low back exercises: evidence for improving exercise regimens. Physical Therapy Journal. 1998; 78, 7: p. 754-765. |
APA Style
Pawel Lizis, Slawomir Wiater, Wojciech Kobza. (2017). Manual Therapy vs. Kinesiotherapy for People with Lumbar Discopathy: A Pilot Randomized Trial. Rehabilitation Science, 2(1), 6-11. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.rs.20170201.12
ACS Style
Pawel Lizis; Slawomir Wiater; Wojciech Kobza. Manual Therapy vs. Kinesiotherapy for People with Lumbar Discopathy: A Pilot Randomized Trial. Rehabil. Sci. 2017, 2(1), 6-11. doi: 10.11648/j.rs.20170201.12
@article{10.11648/j.rs.20170201.12, author = {Pawel Lizis and Slawomir Wiater and Wojciech Kobza}, title = {Manual Therapy vs. Kinesiotherapy for People with Lumbar Discopathy: A Pilot Randomized Trial}, journal = {Rehabilitation Science}, volume = {2}, number = {1}, pages = {6-11}, doi = {10.11648/j.rs.20170201.12}, url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.rs.20170201.12}, eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.rs.20170201.12}, abstract = {Lumbar discopathy is a painful pathology, which needs conservative treatment to relieve symptoms. The aim of this study was to compare the effect of Kaltenborn-Evjenth Orthopedic Manual Therapy (KEOMT) and Kinesiotherapy (KIN) on quality of life, and pain in patients with lumbar discopathy. The study was designed as a pilot randomized controlled trial with concealed allocation, assessor blinding, and intention-to-treat analysis. Eighty participants, 40-70 years old suffering from lumbar discopathy were randomized to an experimental (KEOMT) and a control (KIN) groups. Both groups completed 10 treatments for 5 weeks. All evaluations were performed at baseline (Week 0), and after the treatment (Week 5) for: quality of life (Short Form-36 questionnaire – SF-36), and pain (visual analog scale − VAS). After the intervention the statistical significant between group differences favoring the KEOMT were fund in the SF-36 with regard to physical function (p = 0.027), role physical (p = 0.004), bodily pain (p = 0.027), general health (p = 0.018), vitality (p = 0.019), social functioning (p = 0.034), role emotional (p = 0.028), mental health (p = 0.015), and on VAS (p = 0.014). It was concluded that patients achieve better health benefits caused by KEOMT.}, year = {2017} }
TY - JOUR T1 - Manual Therapy vs. Kinesiotherapy for People with Lumbar Discopathy: A Pilot Randomized Trial AU - Pawel Lizis AU - Slawomir Wiater AU - Wojciech Kobza Y1 - 2017/02/24 PY - 2017 N1 - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.rs.20170201.12 DO - 10.11648/j.rs.20170201.12 T2 - Rehabilitation Science JF - Rehabilitation Science JO - Rehabilitation Science SP - 6 EP - 11 PB - Science Publishing Group SN - 2637-594X UR - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.rs.20170201.12 AB - Lumbar discopathy is a painful pathology, which needs conservative treatment to relieve symptoms. The aim of this study was to compare the effect of Kaltenborn-Evjenth Orthopedic Manual Therapy (KEOMT) and Kinesiotherapy (KIN) on quality of life, and pain in patients with lumbar discopathy. The study was designed as a pilot randomized controlled trial with concealed allocation, assessor blinding, and intention-to-treat analysis. Eighty participants, 40-70 years old suffering from lumbar discopathy were randomized to an experimental (KEOMT) and a control (KIN) groups. Both groups completed 10 treatments for 5 weeks. All evaluations were performed at baseline (Week 0), and after the treatment (Week 5) for: quality of life (Short Form-36 questionnaire – SF-36), and pain (visual analog scale − VAS). After the intervention the statistical significant between group differences favoring the KEOMT were fund in the SF-36 with regard to physical function (p = 0.027), role physical (p = 0.004), bodily pain (p = 0.027), general health (p = 0.018), vitality (p = 0.019), social functioning (p = 0.034), role emotional (p = 0.028), mental health (p = 0.015), and on VAS (p = 0.014). It was concluded that patients achieve better health benefits caused by KEOMT. VL - 2 IS - 1 ER -