Journal of Bodywork and Movement Therapies, 2004/01, 8(1):25-31. doi: 10.1016/s1360-8592(03)00078-0, type of study: ,art,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

Full text    (https://www.bodyworkmovementtherapies.com/article/S1360-8592(03)00078-0/fulltext)

Keywords:

article [2634]
low back pain [524]
OMT [3925]
osteopathic manipulative treatment [3946]
research [483]

Abstract:

A recent review has concluded that: “Initial studies have found massage to be effective for persistent back pain. Spinal manipulation has small clinical benefits that are equivalent to those of other commonly used therapies. The effectiveness of acupuncture remains unclear. All of these treatments seem to be relatively safe. Preliminary evidence suggests that massage, but not acupuncture or spinal manipulation, may reduce the costs of care after an initial course of therapy” (Cherkin et al., Ann. Int. Med. 138(11) (2003) 898). This review was based on a meta-analysis comparing the value of manipulation with massage therapy and acupuncture that concluded that: “There is no evidence that spinal manipulative therapy is superior to other standard treatments for patients with acute or chronic low back pain” (Assendelft et al., Ann. Int. Med. 138(11) (2003) 871). A number of opinions were sought as to the validity of these conclusions, and a commentary was offered by Professor Edzard Ernst on these opinions.