Effectiveness of mobilization with movement on conditioned pain modulation, mechanical hyperalgesia, and pain intensity in adults with chronic low back pain: A randomized controlled trial.

IF 2.2 3区 医学 Q1 REHABILITATION Musculoskeletal Science and Practice Pub Date : 2025-02-01 Epub Date: 2024-11-22 DOI:10.1016/j.msksp.2024.103220
Oliver Martínez Pozas, Juan Nicolás Cuenca-Zaldívar, M Elena González-Alvarez, Francisco José Selva Sarzo, Hector Beltran-Alacreu, Josué Fernández Carnero, Eleuterio A Sánchez Romero
{"title":"Effectiveness of mobilization with movement on conditioned pain modulation, mechanical hyperalgesia, and pain intensity in adults with chronic low back pain: A randomized controlled trial.","authors":"Oliver Martínez Pozas, Juan Nicolás Cuenca-Zaldívar, M Elena González-Alvarez, Francisco José Selva Sarzo, Hector Beltran-Alacreu, Josué Fernández Carnero, Eleuterio A Sánchez Romero","doi":"10.1016/j.msksp.2024.103220","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Chronic low back pain is associated with dysfunctions in endogenous analgesia mechanisms, as evaluated through conditioned pain modulation paradigms. Although mobilization with movement has demonstrated enhancements in conditioned pain modulation among patients with conditions such as knee osteoarthritis, its efficacy in chronic low back pain patients has yet to be established.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To investigate the effects of mobilization with movement compared to sham mobilization in conditioned pain modulation, mechanical hyperalgesia, and pain intensity in chronic low back pain patients.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Randomized controlled trial following CONSORT and TIDieR guidelines.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Fifty-eight patients with chronic low back pain (mean age 48.77 ± 13.92 years) were randomized into the experimental group, which received real mobilization with movement (n = 29), or the sham mobilization with movement group (n = 29). Only one intervention was performed. Patients were assessed before and after intervention. Conditioned pain modulation, mechanical hyperalgesia and pain intensity were assessed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Mobilization with movement resulted in no statistically significant differences compared to sham mobilization for conditioned pain modulation (post-treatment difference: 0.023 [-0.299, 0.345], p = 0.158), mechanical hyperalgesia (post-treatment difference: -0.198 [-0.505, 0.109], p = 0.207), or movement-related pain intensity (post-treatment difference: 0.548 [-0.068, 1.236], p = 0.079) improvements post-intervention. Effect sizes were small for conditioned pain modulation (r = 0.126), mechanical hyperalgesia (r = 0.101), and pain intensity (r = 0.208).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Mobilization with movement resulted in no significant differences compared to sham mobilization with movement after one intervention for conditioned pain modulation, mechanical hyperalgesia or pain intensity, with small effect sizes. However, the findings should be interpreted with caution due to absence of screening for appropriately eligible patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":56036,"journal":{"name":"Musculoskeletal Science and Practice","volume":"75 ","pages":"103220"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Musculoskeletal Science and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msksp.2024.103220","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/11/22 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Chronic low back pain is associated with dysfunctions in endogenous analgesia mechanisms, as evaluated through conditioned pain modulation paradigms. Although mobilization with movement has demonstrated enhancements in conditioned pain modulation among patients with conditions such as knee osteoarthritis, its efficacy in chronic low back pain patients has yet to be established.

Objectives: To investigate the effects of mobilization with movement compared to sham mobilization in conditioned pain modulation, mechanical hyperalgesia, and pain intensity in chronic low back pain patients.

Design: Randomized controlled trial following CONSORT and TIDieR guidelines.

Method: Fifty-eight patients with chronic low back pain (mean age 48.77 ± 13.92 years) were randomized into the experimental group, which received real mobilization with movement (n = 29), or the sham mobilization with movement group (n = 29). Only one intervention was performed. Patients were assessed before and after intervention. Conditioned pain modulation, mechanical hyperalgesia and pain intensity were assessed.

Results: Mobilization with movement resulted in no statistically significant differences compared to sham mobilization for conditioned pain modulation (post-treatment difference: 0.023 [-0.299, 0.345], p = 0.158), mechanical hyperalgesia (post-treatment difference: -0.198 [-0.505, 0.109], p = 0.207), or movement-related pain intensity (post-treatment difference: 0.548 [-0.068, 1.236], p = 0.079) improvements post-intervention. Effect sizes were small for conditioned pain modulation (r = 0.126), mechanical hyperalgesia (r = 0.101), and pain intensity (r = 0.208).

Conclusions: Mobilization with movement resulted in no significant differences compared to sham mobilization with movement after one intervention for conditioned pain modulation, mechanical hyperalgesia or pain intensity, with small effect sizes. However, the findings should be interpreted with caution due to absence of screening for appropriately eligible patients.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
一项随机对照试验:运动对成人慢性腰痛的条件性疼痛调节、机械性痛觉过敏和疼痛强度的影响。
背景:慢性腰痛与内源性镇痛机制的功能障碍有关,通过条件疼痛调节范式进行评估。尽管在膝关节骨性关节炎等患者中,运动动员已被证明可以增强条条性疼痛调节,但其对慢性腰痛患者的疗效尚未确定。目的:研究慢性腰痛患者在条理性疼痛调节、机械性痛觉过敏和疼痛强度方面,运动动员与假动员的效果。设计:随机对照试验,遵循CONSORT和TIDieR指南。方法:58例慢性腰痛患者(平均年龄48.77±13.92岁)随机分为实验组(29例)和假活动组(29例)。只进行了一次干预。在干预前后对患者进行评估。评估条件性疼痛调节、机械性痛觉过敏和疼痛强度。结果:在条件疼痛调节(治疗后差异:0.023 [-0.299,0.345],p = 0.158)、机械性痛觉过敏(治疗后差异:-0.198 [-0.505,0.109],p = 0.207)或运动相关疼痛强度(治疗后差异:0.548 [-0.068,1.236],p = 0.079)的改善方面,运动动员与假动员相比无统计学差异。条条性疼痛调节(r = 0.126)、机械性痛觉过敏(r = 0.101)和疼痛强度(r = 0.208)的效应量较小。结论:在条件性疼痛调节、机械性痛觉过敏或疼痛强度的一次干预后,运动动员与假运动动员相比无显著差异,效应量较小。然而,由于没有对合适的患者进行筛查,研究结果应谨慎解释。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Musculoskeletal Science and Practice
Musculoskeletal Science and Practice Health Professions-Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
8.70%
发文量
152
审稿时长
48 days
期刊介绍: Musculoskeletal Science & Practice, international journal of musculoskeletal physiotherapy, is a peer-reviewed international journal (previously Manual Therapy), publishing high quality original research, review and Masterclass articles that contribute to improving the clinical understanding of appropriate care processes for musculoskeletal disorders. The journal publishes articles that influence or add to the body of evidence on diagnostic and therapeutic processes, patient centered care, guidelines for musculoskeletal therapeutics and theoretical models that support developments in assessment, diagnosis, clinical reasoning and interventions.
期刊最新文献
Sensorimotor control and neurocognitive performance in musculoskeletal disease and injury control. IFOMPT's Educational Standards and International Monitoring: A member survey and review. The prognostic reasoning by physiotherapists of musculoskeletal disorders: A phenomenological exploratory study. Validity and reliability of the Danish version of the Short Form Brief Pain Inventory. Do patients with fibromyalgia syndrome receive updated management strategies? A web-based survey among Italian physiotherapists.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1