Applying Pain Adaptability to Manual Therapy Practice

NCT05209659 · Status: UNKNOWN · Type: OBSERVATIONAL · Enrollment: 32

Last updated 2022-09-29

No results posted yet for this study

Summary

Mechanism research has identified pain adaptive and non-adaptive phenotypes by documenting the response to an ice immersion bath. Pain adaptive individuals exhibited a rapid response to cold and a rapid resolution of symptoms with continued exposure. Non-pain adaptive individuals had the opposite. Pain-adaptive individuals have the endogenous (internal) capacity to self-modulate pain therefore may pursue active self management techniques, whereas non-pain adaptive phenotypes may be more prone to use of external mechanisms (e.g., analgesic medications) for pain relief. A pain adaptive individual is likely to benefit from all forms of conservative active or passive pain modulatory treatments and is expected to have a favorable prognosis. Although this finding is useful, ice bath immersion is an impractical assessment for clinical practice, leaving clinicians with the inability to identify pain adaptive individuals.

Emerging evidence indicates that an associative clinical response associated with an early within session (during the first visit) and between session (from the first to the second visit) during a posterior to anterior mobilization, identifies individuals who have a favorable prognosis with spinal pain. While neurophysiological basis for the analgesic effect of manual therapy has been proposed to date no one has investigated if the associative clinical response is purely another way of identifying pain adaptive or non-pain adaptive individuals. If a within-session or between-session response is associated with the pain adaptive mechanism found during an ice-bath immersion, clinicians could adopt the clinical evaluation technique and improve their ability to identify proper patients for management. The investigators will evaluate the relationship between the pain adaptive mechanistic response from ice-bath immersion and the associative clinical response that occurs during a PA mobilization of the spine.

Conditions

  • Musculoskeletal Manipulations
  • Low Back Pain

Interventions

OTHER

Pragmatic Mobilization

The techniques will of consist of passive, low velocity, oscillatory movements within the physiological range of the joint, applied to the comparable spinal level of the patient (defined as the spinal level that reproduced the patient's familiar pain). The techniques will be modified based on clinician assessment and patient feedback and consist of Grade I through Grade IV movements. Common techniques used may include unilateral posterior-anterior movements, central posterior-anterior movements, and sidelying rotations (without thrust). Since the pragmatic approach is clinician-driven, no time limit will be placed on the application and the number of mobilizations used will depend on the patient feedback (the exact definition of a pragmatic treatment). Patients will be seen for 4 visits. Other Name: Non-thrust manipulation (pragmatically applied)

Sponsors & Collaborators

  • Youngstown State University

    lead OTHER

Principal Investigators

  • Kenneth Learman, PhD · Professor, Department of Graduate Studies in Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, Youngstown State University, Youngstown, Ohio

  • Severine Van Slambrouck, PhD · IRB Director, Youngstown State University, Youngstown, Ohio

  • Damian L Keter · Student, Youngstown State University

Eligibility

Min Age
18 Years
Sex
ALL
Healthy Volunteers
No

Timeline & Regulatory

Start
2022-02-15
Primary Completion
2022-12-17
Completion
2022-12-31

Countries

  • United States

Study Locations

More Related Trials

Read the full study record

This page highlights key information. For complete eligibility criteria, study locations, investigator contacts, and the full protocol, visit the original record on ClinicalTrials.gov.

View NCT05209659 on ClinicalTrials.gov