Article Sidebar
Views pdf: 84
PRELIMINARY EVALUATION OF THE EFFECTIVENESS OF SPINAL DECOMPRESSION MACHINE IN REHABILITATION OF PATIENTS WITH LUMBAR DISC HERNIATION
Main Article Content
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of combining spinal decompression machine in rehabilitation of patients with lumbar disc herniation. Methods: A randomized controlled clinical trial was conducted on 50 patients diagnosed with lumbar disc herniation at the Public Security Traditional Medicine Hospital. Patients were divided into 2 groups: intervention group (n=25) treated with spinal decompression machine combined with conventional physical therapy methods (Paraffin application, TENS current, McKenzie exercises); control group (n=25) treated with conventional physical therapy methods only. Treatment effectiveness was evaluated using Visual Analog Scale (VAS) pain score, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and Modified-Modified Schober Test (MMST) at baseline, after 10 days, and after 20 days. Results: After 20 days of treatment, the intervention group showed significantly greater reduction in back pain VAS score (from 6.28±0.9 to 1.08±0.81) and leg pain VAS score (from 6.68±1.6 to 0.96±0.68) compared to the control group (back VAS from 6.6±0.9 to 1.96±1.1 and leg VAS from 6.28±1.6 to 1.88±1.17) (p<0.05). ODI index decreased from 38.9±17% to 9.43±4.43% in the intervention group versus 39.24±14.25% to 18.56±10.52% in the control group (p<0.05). Spinal flexibility measured by MMST improved from 1.24±0.83cm to 4.24±0.6cm in the intervention group compared to 1.44±1.04cm to 3.68±1.14cm in the control group (p<0.05). Conclusion: Treatment combining spinal decompression machine with conventional physical therapy provides superior effectiveness compared to conventional physical therapy alone in rehabilitation of patients with lumbar disc herniation.
Article Details
Keywords
Disc herniation, lumbar spine, spinal decompression machine, rehabilitation
References
2. Pham H.T.L, Lai T.Q, Mai L.D et al. (2015). Prevalence and pattern of radiographic intervertebral disc degeneration in Vietnamese: a population-based study. Calcified Tissue International. 2015. 96:510-517.
3. Chou R, Huffman L.H. (2007)Nonpharmacologic therapies for acute and chronic low back pain: a review of the evidence for an American Pain Society/American College of Physicians clinical practice guideline. Annals of internal medicine. 2007. 147(7):492-504.
4. Jönsson B, Karlsson M.K. (2016). Gender differences in patients scheduled for lumbar disc herniation surgery: a National Register Study including 15,631 operations. European Spine Journal. 2016. 25:162-167.
5. Choi E, Gil H.I, Ju J, Han WK et al. (2022). Effect of nonsurgical spinal decompression on intensity of pain and herniated disc volume in subacute lumbar herniated disc. International journal of clinical practice. 2022. 2022(1): 6343837.
6. Kim H.S, Yun D.H, Huh K.Y et al. (2008). Effect of Spinal Decompression Therapy Compared with Intermittent Mechanical Traction in Lumbosacral Disc Herniation. Journal of the Korean Academy of Rehabilitation Medicine. 2008. 32(3):319-323.
7. Gaowgzeh R.A.M, Chevidikunnan M.F, BinMulayh E.A et al. 2020. Effect of spinal decompression therapy and core stabilization exercises in management of lumbar disc prolapse: A single blind randomized controlled trial. Journal of back and musculoskeletal rehabilitation. 2020. 33(2):225-231.
8. Kang J, Jeong D.K, Choi H. (2016). Effect of spinal decompression on the lumbar muscle activity and disk height in patients with herniated intervertebral disk. Journal of physical therapy science. 2016. 28(11):3125-3130.