Clinical Trials Logo

Clinical Trial Details — Status: Completed

Administrative data

NCT number NCT01670292
Other study ID # PRiSM Study
Secondary ID U19AT004663
Status Completed
Phase N/A
First received August 2, 2012
Last updated October 25, 2017
Start date September 2012
Est. completion date June 2014

Study information

Verified date October 2017
Source Palmer College of Chiropractic
Contact n/a
Is FDA regulated No
Health authority
Study type Interventional

Clinical Trial Summary

This is a biomechanical study which is Project 1 in the Developmental Center for Clinical and Translational Research in Chiropractic (DCRC I) (NIH/NCCAM grant 1 U19 AT004663-01; principal investigator Christine Goertz, DC, PhD). This study is designed to monitor both physiological and patient self-report outcome variables. In addition, as there is little quantitative information on Spinal Manipulation Technique procedures reported in clinical trials, the study is designed to collect preliminary kinetic measures of the spinal manipulation technique delivery (i.e. force-time profiles).


Description:

Participants with narrowly defined chronic low back pain will be included in this study. Each participant will be treated 12 times over the course of 6 weeks. The following data will be collected: participant characteristics that may predict outcome or be modifiers of force used by provider (gender, age, height, weight, and Body Mass Index); spinal segment load during the pre-load and thrusting phases (force and moment in the pre-load phase, peak load, and loading rate); physiological measures (posterior-anterior global stiffness and flexion-relaxation); patient-centered outcomes of back pain and function; and adverse events.

Study participants (n= 80) will be recruited from the Quad Cities metro area. A team of experienced chiropractic clinicians working at the Palmer Center for Chiropractic Research will treat study participants. Each of the study participants will receive 2 High Velocity Low Amplitude Spinal Manipulation treatment visits per week over a 6 week period. The physiological assessments will be performed immediately before and after Spinal Manipulation delivery during treatment visits 1, 5 & 12 (6 sets of assessments in total). During these same treatment visits, we will also capture the kinetic measures during Spinal Manipulation delivery for spinal segment load analysis. Participant patient-centered outcomes will be measured at baseline 1, and treatment visits 6 and 13. For simplicity, data collection time points will be named as baseline, after 2 weeks, and after 6 weeks.


Recruitment information / eligibility

Status Completed
Enrollment 82
Est. completion date June 2014
Est. primary completion date June 2014
Accepts healthy volunteers Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Gender All
Age group 21 Years to 65 Years
Eligibility Inclusion Criteria:

- NRS score, AVERAGE within the past 24 hours

- Must be =4 at the phone screen or baseline 1 visit

- Must be =2 at phone screen, baseline 1 and baseline 2 visits

- Roland Morris Disability =6

- Age 21-65

- Signed informed consent document

- Chronic (12+ weeks) low back pain

Exclusion Criteria:

- Compliance concerns

- No manipulable lesion in L1-L5 or SI joints

- The absence of typical palpatory characteristics as well as the absence of a global assessment that would indicate that spinal manipulation is likely to generate a positive therapeutic effect, even without the presence of standard palpatory findings

- Ongoing treatment for low back pain by outside provider

- Comorbid conditions

- Serious concomitant illness

- Inflammatory or destructive spinal tissue change

- Ankylosing Spondylytis

- Fibromyalgia

- Rheumatoid Arthritis

- Confirmed or suspected disc herniation with neurological signs

- Neuromuscular disease (e.g. Parkinson's, Muscular Dystrophy, Cerebral Palsy, or Myasthenia gravis

- Spinal surgery <6 months

- Suspicion of drug or alcohol dependence or abuse

- Uncontrolled hypertension

- Lower extremity peripheral arterial disease

- Undetermined, infections or visceral source of low back pain

- Other comorbid conditions prohibiting treatment and/or testing

- Safety concerns

- Bleeding disorders

- Contraindications to High Velocity Low Amplitude Spinal Manipulation

- Inability to tolerate or obtain positon for flexion-relaxation test without condition aggravation

- Inability to tolerate or perform/receive any study procedure without condition aggravation

- Quebec Task Force (QTF) criterion 4-11:

- QTF 4: Pain + radiation to upper/lower limb with neurologic signs

- QTF 5: Presumptive compression of a spinal nerve root on a simple roentgenogram

- QTF 6: Compression of a spinal nerve root confirmed by specific imaging techniques

- QTF 7: Spinal Stenosis

- QTF 8: Postsurgical status, 1-6 months after intervention

- QTF 9: Postsurgical status, >6 months after intervention

- QTF 10: Chronic pain syndrome

- QTF 11: Other diagnoses

- Pregnancy

- Pacemaker or defibrillator

- Inability to read or verbally comprehend English

- Joint replacement

- Use of spinal manipulation within past 4 weeks

- Sensitivity to adhesive

- Diagnostic procedures other than x-ray/UA necessary

- BDI-II =29

- Retention of legal advice and open or pending case related to low back pain

- BMI =40

- Unwilling to have low back and wrist shaved

- Moving from Quad Cities area within next 8 weeks

- Unwilling to postpone treatments for low back pain from another provider

- Seeking or receiving compensation for any disability

Study Design


Related Conditions & MeSH terms


Intervention

Other:
HVLA-SM
High Velocity Low Amplitude Spinal Manipulation

Locations

Country Name City State
United States Palmer College of Chiropractic Davenport Iowa

Sponsors (3)

Lead Sponsor Collaborator
Palmer College of Chiropractic National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health (NCCIH), University of Iowa

Country where clinical trial is conducted

United States, 

References & Publications (2)

Minkalis AL, Vining RD. What is the pain source? A case report of a patient with low back pain and bilateral hip osteonecrosis. J Can Chiropr Assoc. 2015 Sep;59(3):300-10. — View Citation

Xia T, Wilder DG, Gudavalli MR, DeVocht JW, Vining RD, Pohlman KA, Kawchuk GN, Long CR, Goertz CM. Study protocol for patient response to spinal manipulation - a prospective observational clinical trial on physiological and patient-centered outcomes in patients with chronic low back pain. BMC Complement Altern Med. 2014 Aug 8;14:292. doi: 10.1186/1472-6882-14-292. — View Citation

Outcome

Type Measure Description Time frame Safety issue
Primary Patient-Centered Outcome Measurement Mean Change After 6 Weeks (VAS, RMDQ) VAS - Visual Analog Scale - Scale: 0-100 mm (anchors: 0 mm = No Pain, 100 mm = Worst Imaginable Pain). VAS Interpretation: A higher score indicates greater pain intensity. In this study, improvement of 30% from the baseline value was considered clinically significant.
RMDQ - Roland Morris disability questionnaire - Scale: 0 (no disability) to 24 (maximum disability). RMDQ Interpretation: Greater levels of disability are reflected by higher scores. In this study, improvement of 30% from the baseline value was considered clinically significant.
Baseline to 6 weeks
Primary Lumbar-spine Stiffness (LSS) LSS* contains 5 variables: global stiffness (GS, unit: Newton/mm) at L3 from 1) hand palpation 2) a hand-held device & 3) an automated indenter device; global stiffness variation (GSV, unit: Newton/mm) between GS from L1 to L5 from 4) hand palpation & 5) a hand-held device.
*LSS Interpretation: The values of the outcome depend on testing procedure, instruction to participants, and equipment. Currently there is no consensus regarding what value is high than normal, normal, lower than normal.
Baseline, 2 weeks, 6 weeks
Primary Lumbar-spine Stiffness (LSS) - Normalized Global Stiffness Variation LSS contains 2 variables: Palpatory and Handheld device - normalized global stiffness variation (nGSV, unitless).
LSS Interpretation: The values of the outcome depend on testing procedure, instruction to participants, and equipment. Currently there is no consensus regarding what value is higher than normal, normal, lower than normal.
Baseline, 2 weeks, 6 weeks
Primary Flexion-Relaxation Ratio (FRR) FRR contains 4 variables, which are the average right and left back muscle FRR obtained using 1) maximum EMG during flexion, and 2) maximum EMG during extension to normalize EMG during full flexion; and asymmetry between the right and left back muscle FRRs using 3) maximum EMG during flexion, and 4) maximum EMG during extension to normalize EMG during full flexion
FRR Interpretation: The values of the outcome depend on testing procedure, instruction to participants, and equipment. Currently there is no consensus regarding what value is high than normal, normal, lower than normal.
Baseline, 2 weeks, 6 weeks
Secondary Kinetic Measure - Spinal Segment Load (SSL) Force SSL* contains variables: maximum amplitude (Newton) during preload and peak thrust force in anterior-posterior (X), side-to-side (Y), head-to-toe direction (Z) and combined force (C).
*Interpretation: the purpose of the outcomes is to quantify force-time profile of SM. The values of the outcome depend on the doctor who delivers SM, location and direction of SM, participant body position, and equipment. Currently there is no consensus regarding what value is higher than normal, normal, or lower than normal.
Sign convention: because patient position would affect the sign of some measurements, the right side up position was used as the reference position (i.e., the affected measurements assessed in the left side up position had their sign inverted) in order to calculate mean and SD. The value reported is the change from baseline to week 6.
6 weeks
Secondary Kinetic Measure - Spinal Segment Load (SSL) Moment SSL* contains variables: maximum amplitude (Newton*Meter for moment) during preload and peak thrust force in anterior-posterior (X), side-to-side (Y), head-to-toe direction (Z) and combined force (C).
*Interpretation: the purpose of the outcomes is to quantify force-time profile of SM. The values of the outcome depend on the doctor who delivers SM, location and direction of SM, participant body position, and equipment. Currently there is no consensus regarding what value is higher than normal, normal, or lower than normal.
Sign convention: because patient position would affect the sign of some measurements, the right side up position was used as the reference position (i.e., the affected measurements assessed in the left side up position had their sign inverted) in order to calculate mean and SD. The value reported is the change from baseline to week 6.
6 weeks
Secondary Kinetic Measure - Spinal Segment Load (SSL) Rate of Loading for Force SSL* contains variables: rate of loading for force in anterior-posterior (X), side-to-side (Y), head-to-toe direction (Z) and combined force (C).
*Interpretation: the purpose of the outcomes is to quantify force-time profile of SM. The values of the outcome depend on the doctor who delivers SM, location and direction of SM, participant body position, and equipment. Currently there is no consensus regarding what value is higher than normal, normal, or lower than normal.
Sign convention: because patient position would affect the sign of some measurements, the right side up position was used as the reference position (i.e., the affected measurements assessed in the left side up position had their sign inverted) in order to calculate mean and SD. The value reported is the change from baseline to week 6.
6 weeks
Secondary Kinetic Measure - Spinal Segment Load (SSL) Rate of Loading for Moment SSL* contains variables: rate of loading for moment in anterior-posterior (X), side-to-side (Y), head-to-toe direction (Z) and combined force (C).
*Interpretation: the purpose of the outcomes is to quantify force-time profile of SM. The values of the outcome depend on the doctor who delivers SM, location and direction of SM, participant body position, and equipment. Currently there is no consensus regarding what value is higher than normal, normal, or lower than normal.
Sign convention: because patient position would affect the sign of some measurements, the right side up position was used as the reference position (i.e., the affected measurements assessed in the left side up position had their sign inverted) in order to calculate mean and SD. The value reported is the change from baseline to week 6.
6 weeks
Secondary PROMIS-29 - Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information Scale-29: General Health Status Scale 1) The questionnaire contains 7 PROMIS-29 specific items: Anxiety, Depression, Fatigue, Pain Interference, Physical Function, Sleep Disturbance, and Satisfaction with Participation in Social Role (anchors: 1= 'Not at all', 5= 'Very much', higher score is worse).
Each PROMIS-29 specific item is reported in raw score (4-20) and scored in T-score (T), which rescales the raw score into a standardized score with a mean of 50 and a standard deviation (SD) of 10 for a population.
On the T-score metric & interpretation:
A score of 40 is one SD lower than the mean of the reference population.
A score of 60 is one SD higher than the mean of the reference population.
For PROMIS measures, higher scores equals more of the concept being measured (e.g., more Fatigue, more Physical Function). Thus a score of 60 is one standard deviation above the average referenced population. This could be a desirable or undesirable outcome, depending upon the concept being measured.
Baseline, 2 weeks, 6 weeks
Secondary PROMIS-29 - Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information Scale-29: Global Item, Pain NRS 1) The PROMIS questionnaire contains 1 PROMIS global item: Pain NRS, Scale: 0-10 (anchors: 0 = No Pain, 10 = Worst Imaginable Pain, higher score is worse). The PROMIS global item is not scored but reported in raw score. Baseline, 2 weeks, 6 weeks
Secondary Bothersomeness Question asked of participants: "During the past week, how bothersome have each of the following symptoms been?" The bothersomeness questionnaire contains two items: a) low back pain & b) leg pain (sciatica).
Scale: 0-10 (anchors: 0 = Not at all bothersome, 10 = Extremely bothersome)
Baseline, 2 weeks, 6 weeks
See also
  Status Clinical Trial Phase
Completed NCT03916705 - Thoraco-Lumbar Fascia Mobility N/A
Completed NCT04007302 - Modification of the Activity of the Prefrontal Cortex by Virtual Distraction in the Lumbago N/A
Completed NCT03273114 - Cognitive Functional Therapy (CFT) Compared With Core Training Exercise and Manual Therapy (CORE-MT) in Patients With Chronic Low Back Pain N/A
Recruiting NCT03600207 - The Effect of Diaphragm Muscle Training on Chronic Low Back Pain N/A
Completed NCT04284982 - Periodized Resistance Training for Persistent Non-specific Low Back Pain N/A
Recruiting NCT05600543 - Evaluation of the Effect of Lumbar Belt on Spinal Mobility in Subjects With and Without Low Back Pain N/A
Withdrawn NCT05410366 - Safe Harbors in Emergency Medicine, Specific Aim 3
Completed NCT03673436 - Effect of Lumbar Spinal Fusion Predicted by Physiotherapists
Completed NCT02546466 - Effects of Functional Taping on Static Postural Control in Patients With Non-specific Chronic Low Back Pain N/A
Completed NCT00983385 - Evaluation of Effectiveness and Tolerability of Tapentadol Hydrochloride in Subjects With Severe Chronic Low Back Pain Taking Either WHO Step I or Step II Analgesics or no Regular Analgesics Phase 3
Recruiting NCT05156242 - Corticospinal and Motor Behavior Responses After Physical Therapy Intervention in Patients With Chronic Low Back Pain. N/A
Recruiting NCT04673773 - MY RELIEF- Evidence Based Information to Support People Aged 55+ Years Living and Working With Persistent Low-back Pain. N/A
Completed NCT06049277 - Mulligan Technique Versus McKenzie Extension Exercise Chronic Unilateral Radicular Low Back Pain N/A
Completed NCT06049251 - ELDOA Technique Versus Lumbar SNAGS With Motor Control Exercises N/A
Completed NCT04980469 - A Study to Explore the Effect of Vitex Negundo and Zingiber Officinale on Non-specific Chronic Low Back Pain Due to Sedentary Lifestyle N/A
Completed NCT04055545 - High Intensity Interval Training VS Moderate Intensity Continuous Training in Chronic Low Back Pain Subjects N/A
Recruiting NCT05552248 - Assessment of the Safety and Performance of a Lumbar Belt
Recruiting NCT05944354 - Wearable Spine Health System for Military Readiness
Completed NCT05801588 - Participating in T'ai Chi to Reduce Back Pain and Improve Quality of Life N/A
Recruiting NCT05811143 - Examining the Effects of Dorsal Column Stimulation on Pain From Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Related to Epidural Lipomatosis.