NCT00315120 - Osteopathic Health Outcomes in Chronic Low Back Pain (OSTEOPATHIC) Trial | Crick

Overview

The purpose of this study is to determine whether osteopathic manipulative treatment (a type of spinal manipulative therapy used by osteopathic physicians) and ultrasound physical therapy are effective in the treatment of chronic low back pain.

The purpose of this study is to determine whether osteopathic manipulative treatment (a type of spinal manipulative therapy used by osteopathic physicians) and ultrasound physical therapy are effective in the treatment of chronic low back pain. This study uses a 2X2 factorial design to test the hypotheses.

Study Type

INTERVENTIONAL

Allocation

RANDOMIZED

Purpose

TREATMENT

Masking

DOUBLE

Enrollment

455

Conditions

Low Back Pain

Interventions

A. Active OMT and active USTPROCEDURE

Active osteopathic manipulation (OMT) and active ultrasound physical therapy (UST)

B. Sham OMT and active USTPROCEDURE

Sham osteopathic manipulation (OMT) and active ultrasound physical therapy (UST)

C. Active OMT and sham USTPROCEDURE

Active osteopathic manipulation (OMT) and sham ultrasound physical therapy (UST)

Eligibility

Sex: ALLMin age: 21 YearsMax age: 69 Years

Medical Language ↔ Plain English

Inclusion Criteria: * Must give a positive response to the question: "Have you had low back pain constantly or on most days for the last three months?" * Must identify the low back as the primary site of pain * Must agree to not receive any of the following outside of the study during the period of participation: osteopathic manipulative treatment, chiropractic adjustment (including "mobilization" or "manipulation"), physical therapy * Women must not be pregnant or plan to become pregnant during the period of study participation (a negative pregnancy test and willingness to maintain an acceptable method of contraception will be required) Exclusion Criteria: * History of any of the following conditions which may be underlying causes of low back symptoms: cancer, spinal osteomyelitis, spinal fracture, herniated disc, ankylosing spondylitis, cauda equina syndrome * History of surgery involving the low back within the past year or planned low back surgery in the future * History of receiving Workers' Compensation benefits within the past three months * Involvement in current litigation relating to back problems * Current pregnancy or plan to become pregnant during the course of participation in the study * Any of the following that may limit a provider's choice of osteopathic manipulative treatment techniques or hamper compliance with the study protocol: angina or congestive heart failure symptoms that occur at rest or with minimal activity, history of a stroke or transient ischemic attack within the past year * Any of the following that may represent potential contraindications to receiving ultrasound physical therapy: implantation of a cardiac pacemaker, implantation of artificial joints or other biomedical devices, active bleeding or infection in the low back, pregnancy * Use of intravenous, intramuscular, or oral corticosteroids within the past month * History of osteopathic manipulative treatment, chiropractic adjustment, or physical therapy within the past three months or on more than three occasions during the past year * Practitioner or student of any of the following: osteopathic medicine (D.O.) allopathic medicine (M.D.), chiropractic (D.C.), physical therapy

Locations (1)

The Osteopathic Research Center

Fort Worth, Texas, United States

Outcomes

Primary Outcomes

Change in Visual Analogue Scale Score for Pain Over 12 Weeks (OMT vs Sham OMT)

Comparison of the number (proportion) of participants in each study group who achieve a substantial improvement in low back pain over 12 weeks as determined by at least a 40-mm reduction (-40 mm) on the visual analogue scale score for pain compared with the baseline score. Changes in the visual analogue scale scores for pain over 12 weeks may potentially range from a 100-mm reduction (-100 mm) to a 100-mm increase (+100). Any reduction (negative score) represents an improvement in low back pain (i.e., a "better" outcome), while any increase (positive score) represents a worsening of low back pain (i.e., a "worse" outcome). However, only those "better" outcomes represented by change scores less than or equal to -40 mm are considered to represent substantial improvement in low back pain, which is the primary outcome measure of this study. For analyses wherein floor effects are important, the 40-mm reduction threshold for substantial improvement may be replaced by 50% reduction (-50%).

Time frame: 12 weeks

Change in Visual Analogue Scale Score for Pain Over 12 Weeks (Active UST vs Sham UST)

Comparison of the number (proportion) of participants in each study group who achieve a substantial improvement in low back pain over 12 weeks as determined by at least a 40-mm reduction (-40 mm) on the visual analogue scale score for pain compared with the baseline score. Changes in the visual analogue scale scores for pain over 12 weeks may potentially range from a 100-mm reduction (-100 mm) to a 100-mm increase (+100). Any reduction (negative score) represents an improvement in low back pain (i.e., a "better" outcome), while any increase (positive score) represents a worsening of low back pain (i.e., a "worse" outcome). However, only those "better" outcomes represented by change scores less than or equal to -40 mm are considered to represent substantial improvement in low back pain, which is the primary outcome measure of this study. For analyses wherein floor effects are important, the 40-mm reduction threshold for substantial improvement may be replaced by 50% reduction (-50%).

Time frame: 12 weeks

Secondary Outcomes

Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (OMT and Sham OMT - Week 4)