Use the Back button in your browser to see the other results of your search or to select another record.

Detailed Search Results

A comparison of inverted spinal traction and conventional traction in the treatment of lumbar disc herniations
Guvenol K, Tuzun C, Peker O, Goktay Y
Physiotherapy Theory and Practice 2000;16(3):151-160
clinical trial
5/10 [Eligibility criteria: No; Random allocation: Yes; Concealed allocation: No; Baseline comparability: Yes; Blind subjects: No; Blind therapists: No; Blind assessors: No; Adequate follow-up: Yes; Intention-to-treat analysis: No; Between-group comparisons: Yes; Point estimates and variability: Yes. Note: Eligibility criteria item does not contribute to total score] *This score has been confirmed*

The purpose of this investigation of lumbar disc herniation patients was to compare the efficacy of the inversion spinal traction and the conventional mechanical spinal traction on several clinical parameters and computed tomography. This investigation consisted of 29 patients with low back pain and sciatica due to lumbar disc herniation. Patients were randomly assigned into two groups: an inversion spinal traction that was applied to 15 patients, and a conventional traction that was applied to 14 patients for ten sessions. The efficacy of the treatments was evaluated based upon clinical parameters before, immediately after, and three months after the treatment. Computed tomographic (CT) investigation was done before and immediately after the treatment. Both methods of traction were found to be clinically effective. Although there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups based upon the clinical parameters, CT findings of the conventional traction group tended to show more improved parameters than the inverted spinal traction group. Reasons for better results of the conventional traction are discussed and the necessity for further investigations on this topic is emphasized.

Full text (sometimes free) may be available at these link(s):      help