Effectiveness of mechanical diagnosis and therapy in patients with non-specific chronic low back pain: a literature review with meta-analysis.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the effectiveness of mechanical diagnosis and therapy (MDT) in patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP) compared to other traditional physical therapy interventions. METHODS: Randomized controlled trials investigating the effect of MDT compared to other traditional physical...
| Autores: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Estado: | Versión publicada |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2021 |
| País: | España |
| Institución: | INCLIVA |
| Repositorio: | r-INCLIVA. Repositorio Institucional de Producción Científica de INCLIVA |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:incliva.fundanetsuite.com:p15128 |
| Acceso en línea: | https://incliva.portalinvestigacion.com/publicaciones/15128 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | Chronic pain Diagnosis Low back pain Meta-analysis Musculoskeletal manipulations Review |
| Sumario: | OBJECTIVE: To determine the effectiveness of mechanical diagnosis and therapy (MDT) in patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP) compared to other traditional physical therapy interventions. METHODS: Randomized controlled trials investigating the effect of MDT compared to other traditional physical therapy interventions in individuals with CLBP were considered eligible. For the purpose of this review, MDT was compared to active and passive physical therapy interventions. Independent reviewers assessed the eligibility of studies, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias. The primary outcomes investigated were pain and disability. RESULTS: Fourteen studies were included in the review. Of these, 11 provided data to be included in the meta-analyses. Our findings showed that MDT was no more effective in decreasing pain (standardized mean difference [SMD]=0.01, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.44, 0.46) and disability (SMD=0.08, 95% CI: -0.53, 0.68) than other active treatments. Similar results were found when comparing MDT to other passive treatments for pain (SMD=-0.39, 95% CI: -0.90, 0.11) and disability (SMD=-0.13, 95% CI: -0.29, 0.03). CONCLUSION: There is low to moderate quality evidence that MDT is not superior than other traditional physical therapy interventions in improving pain and disability in people with CLBP. |
|---|