Skip to main content
Top
Published in: European Spine Journal 2/2019

01-02-2019 | Magnetic Resonance Imaging | Original Article

Differential patient responses to spinal manipulative therapy and their relation to spinal degeneration and post-treatment changes in disc diffusion

Authors: Arnold Y. L. Wong, Eric C. Parent, Sukhvinder S. Dhillon, Narasimha Prasad, Dino Samartzis, Gregory N. Kawchuk

Published in: European Spine Journal | Issue 2/2019

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

Our prior study revealed that people with non-specific low back pain (LBP) who self-reported a > 30% improvement in disability after SMT demonstrated significant post-treatment improvements in spinal stiffness, dynamic muscle thickness and disc diffusion, while those not having self-reported improvement did not have these objective changes. The mechanism underlying this differential post-SMT response remains unknown. This exploratory secondary analysis aimed to determine whether persons with non-specific LBP who respond to spinal SMT have unique lumbar magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings compared to SMT non-responders.

Methods

Thirty-two participants with non-specific LBP received lumbar MRI before and after SMT on Day 1. Resulting images were assessed for facet degeneration, disc degeneration, Modic changes and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC). SMT was provided again on Day 4 without imaging. SMT responders were classified as having a ≥ 30% reduction in their modified Oswestry disability index at Day 7. Baseline MRI findings between responders and non-responders were compared. The associations between SMT responder status and the presence/absence of post-SMT increases in ADC values of discs associated with painful/non-painful segments as determined by palpation were calculated. In this secondary analysis, a statistical trend was considered as a P value between 0.05 and 0.10.

Results

Although there was no significant between-group difference in all spinal degenerative features (e.g. Modic changes), SMT responders tended to have a lower prevalence of severely degenerated facets (P = 0.05) and higher baseline ADC values at the L4-5 disc when compared to SMT non-responders (P = 0.09). Post hoc analyses revealed that 180 patients per group should have been recruited to find significant between-group differences in the two features. SMT responders were also characterized by significant increases in post-SMT ADC values at discs associated with painful segments identified by palpation (P < 0.01).

Conclusions

The current secondary analysis suggests that the spines of SMT responders appear to differ from non-responders with respect to degeneration changes in posterior joints and disc diffusion. Although this analysis was preliminary, it provides a new direction to investigate the mechanisms underlying SMT and the existence of discrete forms of treatment-specific LBP.

Graphical abstract

These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
6.
go back to reference Long A, Donelson R, Fung T (2004) Does it matter which exercise? A randomized control trial of exercise for low back pain. Spine 29:2593–2602CrossRefPubMed Long A, Donelson R, Fung T (2004) Does it matter which exercise? A randomized control trial of exercise for low back pain. Spine 29:2593–2602CrossRefPubMed
30.
go back to reference Gjorup T (1988) The kappa coefficient and the prevalence of a diagnosis. Methods Inf Med 27:184–186CrossRefPubMed Gjorup T (1988) The kappa coefficient and the prevalence of a diagnosis. Methods Inf Med 27:184–186CrossRefPubMed
34.
go back to reference Portney LG, Watkins MP (2009) Foundations of clinical research applications to practice, 3rd edn. Pearson Education Inc, New Jersey Portney LG, Watkins MP (2009) Foundations of clinical research applications to practice, 3rd edn. Pearson Education Inc, New Jersey
37.
go back to reference Eliasziw M, Young SL, Woodbury MG, Fryday-Field K (1994) Statistical methodology for the concurrent assessment of interrater and intrarater reliability: using goniometric measurements as an example. Phys Ther 74:777–788CrossRefPubMed Eliasziw M, Young SL, Woodbury MG, Fryday-Field K (1994) Statistical methodology for the concurrent assessment of interrater and intrarater reliability: using goniometric measurements as an example. Phys Ther 74:777–788CrossRefPubMed
44.
48.
go back to reference Delitto A (2005) Research in low back pain: time to stop seeking the elusive “magic bullet”. Phys Ther 85:206–208PubMed Delitto A (2005) Research in low back pain: time to stop seeking the elusive “magic bullet”. Phys Ther 85:206–208PubMed
52.
go back to reference Waddell G, Newton M, Henderson I et al (1993) A Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire (FABQ) and the role of fear-avoidance beliefs in chronic low back pain and disability. Pain 52:157–168CrossRefPubMed Waddell G, Newton M, Henderson I et al (1993) A Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire (FABQ) and the role of fear-avoidance beliefs in chronic low back pain and disability. Pain 52:157–168CrossRefPubMed
53.
go back to reference Mondloch M (2001) Does how you do depend on how you think you’ll do? A systematic review of the evidence for a relation between patients” recovery expectations and health outcomes. CMAJ 165:174–179PubMedPubMedCentral Mondloch M (2001) Does how you do depend on how you think you’ll do? A systematic review of the evidence for a relation between patients” recovery expectations and health outcomes. CMAJ 165:174–179PubMedPubMedCentral
Metadata
Title
Differential patient responses to spinal manipulative therapy and their relation to spinal degeneration and post-treatment changes in disc diffusion
Authors
Arnold Y. L. Wong
Eric C. Parent
Sukhvinder S. Dhillon
Narasimha Prasad
Dino Samartzis
Gregory N. Kawchuk
Publication date
01-02-2019
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
European Spine Journal / Issue 2/2019
Print ISSN: 0940-6719
Electronic ISSN: 1432-0932
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-018-5851-2

Other articles of this Issue 2/2019

European Spine Journal 2/2019 Go to the issue