BACKGROUND: Low back pain (LBP) is common, costly, and disabling. This study assesses a novel and simple LBP evaluation method and its merit in guiding the direction of a self-treatment exercise.
METHODS: Randomized open-label intention is used to treat the study. Consecutive patients with LBP ≥ three months and pain ≥ 5/10 were evaluated in a Vancouver clinic with the sacroiliac forward flexion test (SIFFT) by comparing the height of posterior superior iliac spines using a level. Those with asymmetry ≥ 5 mm were offered participation. The assistant, who generated and encrypted the randomization, assigned participants: group 1 learned a two-minute, SIFFT-derived, sacroiliac-leveling exercise (SIFFT-E) as needed for LBP relief; group 2 used a pelvic stabilization belt as needed to prevent LBP, and group 3 continued the usual care. After one month, all participants used SIFFT-E and belt as needed for one month. The identifier number of this article in Clinicaltrials.gov is #NCT03888235. The trial is closed. Our primary outcome measure was the Oswestry disability index (ODI) (decrease) from baseline to one and two months. We also followed SIFFT improvement (decrease).
RESULTS: Of 72 LBP patients, 62 (86%) had ≥ 5 mm asymmetry. From zero to one month, the 21 (one dropout) SIFFT-E participants outperformed the 20 usual care participants for ODI improvement (12.5 ± 14.8 vs. -3.4 ± 14.9 points; mean difference 15.9 [CI 6.7-25.0]; P = 0.002 with number needed to treat (NNT) of 3.0 for ODI improvement ≥ 11). Belt use results were intermediate. At two months, after all the 62 participants used the exercise and belt as needed, combined ODI improvements were clinically significant (12.0 ± 18.4 points), and SIFFT asymmetry was reduced by 8.6 ± 8.6 mm. Five (8%) exercise and 12 (19%) belt wearers experienced mild side effects.
CONCLUSIONS: Sacroiliac asymmetry appears to be frequent. SIFFT may be clinically useful as an evaluation tool for prescribing a simple self-directed corrective exercise as seen by clinically significant improvements in function and asymmetry.

BACKGROUND: Chronic non-specific low back pain (NLBP) affects people of all ages and pose a serious threat to human health. Fu\'s subcutaneous needling (FSN) has been reported to be effective in treating such disorders, but the control group is lacking. The aim of this randomized parallel study is to compare the long-term efficiency of FSN therapy with massage therapy for treatment of NLBP.
METHODS: A total of 60 chronic NLBP patients recruited from Yongchuan Hospital of Chongqing Medical University were randomly assigned to the FSN therapy group or massage therapy group. The main prognostic indicators included pain intensity measured on the visual analog scale (VAS), functional outcomes assessed by the Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) scoring system, functional disability estimated using Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and quality of life evaluated by Short Form Health Survey Questionnaire (SF-36). These indicators were evaluated at baseline, post-treatment, 3 months after treatment, and 12 months after treatment.
RESULTS: After 12 months of follow-up, we found that the 2 treatment regimens exhibited similarly favorable results in terms of all prognostic indicators in comparison with their respective baseline data (all P<0.01). However, compared with the massage group, the FSN group showed more significant improvements in VAS, JOA, and ODI at all follow-up time points, as well as SF-36 at post-treatment and 12 months after treatment (all P<0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that FSN therapy is significantly more effective than massage therapy in the improvement of pain intensity, functional outcomes, functional disability, and quality of life in a long-term follow-up. However, future studies with larger sample sizes are needed to corroborate the long-term efficiency of FSN therapy for chronic NLBP.
BACKGROUND: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ChiCTR2100050866.