Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2009 Dec;18(12):1843-50.
doi: 10.1007/s00586-009-1044-3. Epub 2009 May 31.

No effect of traction in patients with low back pain: a single centre, single blind, randomized controlled trial of Intervertebral Differential Dynamics Therapy

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

No effect of traction in patients with low back pain: a single centre, single blind, randomized controlled trial of Intervertebral Differential Dynamics Therapy

Janneke J P Schimmel et al. Eur Spine J. 2009 Dec.

Abstract

Low back pain (LBP) poses a significant problem to society. Although initial conservative therapy may be beneficial, persisting chronic LBP still frequently leads to expensive invasive intervention. A novel non-invasive therapy that focuses on discogenic LBP is Intervertebral Differential Dynamics Therapy (IDD Therapy, North American Medical Corp. Reg U.S.). IDD Therapy consists of intermittent traction sessions in the Accu-SPINA device (Steadfast Corporation Ltd, Essex, UK), an FDA approved, class II medical device. The intervertebral disc and facet joints are unloaded through axial distraction, positioning and relaxation cycles. The purpose of this study is to investigate the effect of IDD Therapy when added to a standard graded activity program for chronic LBP patients. In a single blind, single centre, randomized controlled trial; 60 consecutive patients were assigned to either the SHAM or the IDD Therapy. All subjects received the standard conservative therapeutic care (graded activity) and 20 sessions in the Accu-SPINA device. The traction weight in the IDD Therapy was systematically increased until 50% of a person's body weight plus 4.45 kg (10 lb) was reached. The SHAM group received a non-therapeutic traction weight of 4.45 kg in all sessions. The main outcome was assessed using a 100-mm visual analogue scale (VAS) for LBP. Secondary outcomes were VAS scores for leg pain, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Short-Form 36 (SF-36). All parameters were measured before and 2, 6 and 14 weeks after start of the treatment. Fear of (re)injury due to movement or activities (Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia), coping strategies (Utrecht Coping List) and use of pain medication were recorded before and at 14 weeks. A repeated measures analysis was performed. The two groups were comparable at baseline in terms of demographic, clinical and psychological characteristics, indicating that the random allocation had succeeded. VAS low back pain improved significantly from 61 (+/-25) to 32 (+/-27) with the IDD protocol and 53 (+/-26) to 36 (+/-27) in the SHAM protocol. Moreover, leg pain, ODI and SF-36 scores improved significantly but in both groups. The use of pain medication decreased significantly, whereas scores for kinesiophobia and coping remained at the same non-pathological level. None of the parameters showed a difference between both protocols. Both treatment regimes had a significant beneficial effect on LBP, leg pain, functional status and quality of life after 14 weeks. The added axial, intermittent, mechanical traction of IDD Therapy to a standard graded activity program has been shown not to be effective.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Time line of the treatment protocol. The treatment started with the traction therapy whether the IDD or the SHAM protocol. This consisted of 20 half-hour sessions during the first 6 weeks of the treatment (green line). Two weeks after initiation started the standard therapeutic care (graded activity) and lasted 12 weeks (blue line). The graded activity program consisted of 1 h of training for 2 days per week
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Mean VAS scores (±SD) of low back pain in the IDD group and the SHAM group. The effect of time was statistically significant (P < 0.05)
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Functional status, as measured with the ODI, in the IDD group and the SHAM group. The effect of time was statistically significant (P < 0.05)
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Health-related quality of life, as measured with the SF-36, in the IDD group and the SHAM group. Only the effect of time was statistically significant (P < 0.05), indicating an improvement after 14 weeks regardless of traction protocol

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Anema JR, Steenstra IA, Bongers PM, et al. Multidisciplinary rehabilitation for subacute low back pain: graded activity or workplace intervention or both? A randomized controlled trial. Spine. 2007;32:291–298. doi: 10.1097/01.brs.0000253604.90039.ad. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Beattie PF, Nelson RM, Michener LA, et al. Outcomes after a prone lumbar traction protocol for patients with activity-limiting low back pain: a prospective case series study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2008;89:269–274. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2007.06.778. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Beurskens AJ, de Vet HC, Koke AJ, et al. Efficacy of traction for nonspecific low back pain: 12-week and 6-month results of a randomized clinical trial. Spine. 1997;22:2756–2762. doi: 10.1097/00007632-199712010-00011. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Borman P, Keskin D, Bodur H. The efficacy of lumbar traction in the management of patients with low back pain. Rheumatol Int. 2003;23:82–86. - PubMed
    1. Clarke J, van Tulder M, Blomberg S, et al. Traction for low back pain with or without sciatica: an updated systematic review within the framework of the Cochrane collaboration. Spine. 2006;31:1591–1599. doi: 10.1097/01.brs.0000222043.09835.72. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

-