search
Back to results

Physical Therapy Treatments, Including Neural Mobilization and Hip/Back Stretches for People Between 50-89 With Lumbar Spinal Stenosis and Leg Pain Provoked by Walking

Primary Purpose

Lumbar Spinal Stenosis

Status
Completed
Phase
Not Applicable
Locations
United States
Study Type
Interventional
Intervention
Physical therapy intervention
Sponsored by
Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center
About
Eligibility
Locations
Arms
Outcomes
Full info

About this trial

This is an interventional treatment trial for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis focused on measuring Degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis, Neural mobilization, Hip extension mobilization, Case series, Neurogenic claudication

Eligibility Criteria

50 Years - 89 Years (Adult, Older Adult)All SexesDoes not accept healthy volunteers

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Adults aged between 50-89 years old
  • Intermittent unilateral or bilateral leg pain occurring with walking and standing activities that is relieved only with sitting or by assuming flexed positions
  • Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) confirmation of lumbar spinal stenosis
  • Leg symptoms greater than 4/10 and provoked within 15 minutes of walking

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Prior lumbar surgery
  • Spinal injection in last 6 weeks
  • Impaired walking tolerance due to factors other than neurogenic claudication
  • Inability to follow the rater's instructions
  • Any medical contra-indication for hip mobilizations in extension or flexion
  • Current medico-legal issues

Sites / Locations

  • Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center

Arms of the Study

Arm 1

Arm Type

Experimental

Arm Label

Intervention

Arm Description

Outcomes

Primary Outcome Measures

Change in Swiss Spinal Stenosis Questionnaire
The Swiss Spinal Stenosis Questionnaire is a condition specific measure used for subjects with lumbar spinal stenosis. The measure consists of three separate subscales: Symptom, Functional, Satisfaction. Each scale has five to seven items, with each item scored on a Likert response scale with four to five options. The subscale score is calculated as the unweighted mean of all answered items, with a range of scores for each subscale as follows: one to five for symptom severity, one to four for physical function, and one to four for satisfaction. Lower scores represent fewer symptoms, greater function, and greater satisfaction with the results of their treatment. The subscale scores will be assessed independently of each other.
Change in Numeric Pain Rating Scale
The Numeric Pain Rating Scale is an objective measure for subjects to rate their pain. This measure uses an 11 point scale where "0" represents "no pain" and "10" represents "the worst imaginable pain". Subjects in this study will be asked to rate their average pain during walking activities during the past week. The NPRS is a valid measure that has been shown to have good test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.61) (Childs et al 2005). This measure has been used in previous studies examining subjects with degenerative LSS.
Change in Total Ambulation Time
Total Ambulation Time is an objective test to measure walking tolerance that has shown concordance correlation coefficient of 0.96 test-retest reliability in subjects with lumbar spinal stenosis (Deen et al 2000). This is a valid measure as it reproduces a subject's symptoms in the same manner as they are reproduced during daily life. Subjects will be asked to ambulate on a treadmill in a fully erect posture at a self-selected walking pace. Subjects will not be permitted to lean forward or hold onto handrails. Ambulation will be stopped at 15 minutes or when the subject reports a level of discomfort in their leg(s) that would cause them to stop walking in usual daily life situations (Deen et al 2000). The subject will be asked to remain standing for up to 15 seconds (if tolerated) in order to assess whether the leg symptoms can resolve in standing or if sitting is required. Longer walking times are considered an improvement in condition with this test.
Change in Time to First Symptoms
Time to First Symptoms is an objective test used to record the time it takes before the onset of leg symptoms during treadmill ambulation. This measure has shown concordance correlation coefficient of 0.98 for test-retest reliability in subjects with lumbar spinal stenosis (Deen et al 2000). It is a valid measure of leg symptoms onset during an ambulation activity, which is responsible for symptom onset in daily life. Subjects will ambulate on a treadmill in a fully erect posture. Subjects will ambulate at a self-selected comfortable walking pace and will not be permitted to lean forward or hold onto handrails. Subjects will be asked to report the moment of first onset of leg symptoms (unilateral or bilateral leg pain, fatigue, paresthesia, and/or tightness). Longer times to the onset of first symptoms are considered an improvement in condition with this test

Secondary Outcome Measures

Full Information

First Posted
November 29, 2017
Last Updated
January 22, 2021
Sponsor
Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center
search

1. Study Identification

Unique Protocol Identification Number
NCT03368638
Brief Title
Physical Therapy Treatments, Including Neural Mobilization and Hip/Back Stretches for People Between 50-89 With Lumbar Spinal Stenosis and Leg Pain Provoked by Walking
Official Title
Neural And Hip Mobilizations In Patients With Neurogenic Claudication Associated With Degenerative Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Case Series
Study Type
Interventional

2. Study Status

Record Verification Date
January 2021
Overall Recruitment Status
Completed
Study Start Date
January 1, 2018 (Actual)
Primary Completion Date
April 22, 2019 (Actual)
Study Completion Date
April 22, 2019 (Actual)

3. Sponsor/Collaborators

Responsible Party, by Official Title
Sponsor
Name of the Sponsor
Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center

4. Oversight

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Drug Product
No
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Device Product
No
Data Monitoring Committee
No

5. Study Description

Brief Summary
Aging of the back is common in the older people and can result in difficulties standing and walking. Conservative treatment is recommended before considering surgery. Some recommended exercises involve the use of expensive equipment. The present study plans to evaluate if specifically moving the nerves in the legs/back and improving flexibility of the hip and back can benefit patients. These exercises require no equipment, are simple to perform, and can provide patients a way to continue to perform these exercises at home. The purposes of this study are to (1) observe the benefit of a treatment program involving moving the nerves of the leg/back, stretching the legs and low back in patients with low back pain and difficulties walking; and (2) determine if benefits received remain at a 3-month follow-up.

6. Conditions and Keywords

Primary Disease or Condition Being Studied in the Trial, or the Focus of the Study
Lumbar Spinal Stenosis
Keywords
Degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis, Neural mobilization, Hip extension mobilization, Case series, Neurogenic claudication

7. Study Design

Primary Purpose
Treatment
Study Phase
Not Applicable
Interventional Study Model
Single Group Assignment
Model Description
Case Series
Masking
None (Open Label)
Allocation
N/A
Enrollment
8 (Actual)

8. Arms, Groups, and Interventions

Arm Title
Intervention
Arm Type
Experimental
Intervention Type
Other
Intervention Name(s)
Physical therapy intervention
Intervention Description
Double knee to chest stretches, hip extension mobilization, neural mobilizations, home exercises program
Primary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Change in Swiss Spinal Stenosis Questionnaire
Description
The Swiss Spinal Stenosis Questionnaire is a condition specific measure used for subjects with lumbar spinal stenosis. The measure consists of three separate subscales: Symptom, Functional, Satisfaction. Each scale has five to seven items, with each item scored on a Likert response scale with four to five options. The subscale score is calculated as the unweighted mean of all answered items, with a range of scores for each subscale as follows: one to five for symptom severity, one to four for physical function, and one to four for satisfaction. Lower scores represent fewer symptoms, greater function, and greater satisfaction with the results of their treatment. The subscale scores will be assessed independently of each other.
Time Frame
Baseline, 3-6 weeks, 3-6 months
Title
Change in Numeric Pain Rating Scale
Description
The Numeric Pain Rating Scale is an objective measure for subjects to rate their pain. This measure uses an 11 point scale where "0" represents "no pain" and "10" represents "the worst imaginable pain". Subjects in this study will be asked to rate their average pain during walking activities during the past week. The NPRS is a valid measure that has been shown to have good test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.61) (Childs et al 2005). This measure has been used in previous studies examining subjects with degenerative LSS.
Time Frame
Baseline, 3-6 weeks, 3-6 months
Title
Change in Total Ambulation Time
Description
Total Ambulation Time is an objective test to measure walking tolerance that has shown concordance correlation coefficient of 0.96 test-retest reliability in subjects with lumbar spinal stenosis (Deen et al 2000). This is a valid measure as it reproduces a subject's symptoms in the same manner as they are reproduced during daily life. Subjects will be asked to ambulate on a treadmill in a fully erect posture at a self-selected walking pace. Subjects will not be permitted to lean forward or hold onto handrails. Ambulation will be stopped at 15 minutes or when the subject reports a level of discomfort in their leg(s) that would cause them to stop walking in usual daily life situations (Deen et al 2000). The subject will be asked to remain standing for up to 15 seconds (if tolerated) in order to assess whether the leg symptoms can resolve in standing or if sitting is required. Longer walking times are considered an improvement in condition with this test.
Time Frame
Baseline, 3-6 weeks
Title
Change in Time to First Symptoms
Description
Time to First Symptoms is an objective test used to record the time it takes before the onset of leg symptoms during treadmill ambulation. This measure has shown concordance correlation coefficient of 0.98 for test-retest reliability in subjects with lumbar spinal stenosis (Deen et al 2000). It is a valid measure of leg symptoms onset during an ambulation activity, which is responsible for symptom onset in daily life. Subjects will ambulate on a treadmill in a fully erect posture. Subjects will ambulate at a self-selected comfortable walking pace and will not be permitted to lean forward or hold onto handrails. Subjects will be asked to report the moment of first onset of leg symptoms (unilateral or bilateral leg pain, fatigue, paresthesia, and/or tightness). Longer times to the onset of first symptoms are considered an improvement in condition with this test
Time Frame
Baseline, 3-6 weeks

10. Eligibility

Sex
All
Minimum Age & Unit of Time
50 Years
Maximum Age & Unit of Time
89 Years
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
No
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria: Adults aged between 50-89 years old Intermittent unilateral or bilateral leg pain occurring with walking and standing activities that is relieved only with sitting or by assuming flexed positions Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) confirmation of lumbar spinal stenosis Leg symptoms greater than 4/10 and provoked within 15 minutes of walking Exclusion Criteria: Prior lumbar surgery Spinal injection in last 6 weeks Impaired walking tolerance due to factors other than neurogenic claudication Inability to follow the rater's instructions Any medical contra-indication for hip mobilizations in extension or flexion Current medico-legal issues
Overall Study Officials:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Reid D Gehring, DPT
Organizational Affiliation
Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center
Official's Role
Principal Investigator
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Jean-Michel Brismee, ScD
Organizational Affiliation
Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center
Official's Role
Study Chair
Facility Information:
Facility Name
Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center
City
Amarillo
State/Province
Texas
ZIP/Postal Code
79109
Country
United States

12. IPD Sharing Statement

Plan to Share IPD
No
IPD Sharing Plan Description
All collected IPD
Citations:
PubMed Identifier
25620608
Citation
Ammendolia C, Chow N. Clinical outcomes for neurogenic claudication using a multimodal program for lumbar spinal stenosis: a retrospective study. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2015 Mar-Apr;38(3):188-94. doi: 10.1016/j.jmpt.2014.12.006. Epub 2015 Jan 22.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
21367646
Citation
Backstrom KM, Whitman JM, Flynn TW. Lumbar spinal stenosis-diagnosis and management of the aging spine. Man Ther. 2011 Aug;16(4):308-17. doi: 10.1016/j.math.2011.01.010. Epub 2011 Mar 2.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
28127827
Citation
Bade M, Cobo-Estevez M, Neeley D, Pandya J, Gunderson T, Cook C. Effects of manual therapy and exercise targeting the hips in patients with low-back pain-A randomized controlled trial. J Eval Clin Pract. 2017 Aug;23(4):734-740. doi: 10.1111/jep.12705. Epub 2017 Jan 27.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
11249159
Citation
Bodack MP, Monteiro M. Therapeutic exercise in the treatment of patients with lumbar spinal stenosis. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2001 Mar;(384):144-52. doi: 10.1097/00003086-200103000-00017.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
22547920
Citation
Burns SA, Mintken PE, Austin GP, Cleland J. Short-term response of hip mobilizations and exercise in individuals with chronic low back pain: a case series. J Man Manip Ther. 2011 May;19(2):100-7. doi: 10.1179/2042618610Y.0000000007.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
15928561
Citation
Childs JD, Piva SR, Fritz JM. Responsiveness of the numeric pain rating scale in patients with low back pain. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2005 Jun 1;30(11):1331-4. doi: 10.1097/01.brs.0000164099.92112.29.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
22749295
Citation
Cleland JA, Whitman JM, Houser JL, Wainner RS, Childs JD. Psychometric properties of selected tests in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis. Spine J. 2012 Oct;12(10):921-31. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2012.05.004. Epub 2012 Jun 28.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
11040847
Citation
Deen HG Jr, Zimmerman RS, Lyons MK, McPhee MC, Verheijde JL, Lemens SM. Test-retest reproducibility of the exercise treadmill examination in lumbar spinal stenosis. Mayo Clin Proc. 2000 Oct;75(10):1002-7. doi: 10.4065/75.10.1002.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
19119380
Citation
Ellis RF, Hing WA. Neural mobilization: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials with an analysis of therapeutic efficacy. J Man Manip Ther. 2008;16(1):8-22. doi: 10.1179/106698108790818594.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
9630153
Citation
Fritz JM, Delitto A, Welch WC, Erhard RE. Lumbar spinal stenosis: a review of current concepts in evaluation, management, and outcome measurements. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1998 Jun;79(6):700-8. doi: 10.1016/s0003-9993(98)90048-x.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
20227646
Citation
Genevay S, Atlas SJ. Lumbar spinal stenosis. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol. 2010 Apr;24(2):253-65. doi: 10.1016/j.berh.2009.11.001.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
26917940
Citation
Gilbert KK, Roger James C, Apte G, Brown C, Sizer PS, Brismee JM, Smith MP. Effects of simulated neural mobilization on fluid movement in cadaveric peripheral nerve sections: implications for the treatment of neuropathic pain and dysfunction. J Man Manip Ther. 2015 Sep;23(4):219-25. doi: 10.1179/2042618614Y.0000000094.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
26955255
Citation
Gilbert KK, Smith MP, Sobczak S, James CR, Sizer PS, Brismee JM. Effects of lower limb neurodynamic mobilization on intraneural fluid dispersion of the fourth lumbar nerve root: an unembalmed cadaveric investigation. J Man Manip Ther. 2015 Dec;23(5):239-45. doi: 10.1179/2042618615Y.0000000009.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
20530650
Citation
Goren A, Yildiz N, Topuz O, Findikoglu G, Ardic F. Efficacy of exercise and ultrasound in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis: a prospective randomized controlled trial. Clin Rehabil. 2010 Jul;24(7):623-31. doi: 10.1177/0269215510367539. Epub 2010 Jun 8.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
8923625
Citation
Inufusa A, An HS, Lim TH, Hasegawa T, Haughton VM, Nowicki BH. Anatomic changes of the spinal canal and intervertebral foramen associated with flexion-extension movement. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1996 Nov 1;21(21):2412-20. doi: 10.1097/00007632-199611010-00002.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
7575718
Citation
Katz JN, Dalgas M, Stucki G, Katz NP, Bayley J, Fossel AH, Chang LC, Lipson SJ. Degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis. Diagnostic value of the history and physical examination. Arthritis Rheum. 1995 Sep;38(9):1236-41. doi: 10.1002/art.1780380910.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
21301392
Citation
Kanno H, Ozawa H, Koizumi Y, Morozumi N, Aizawa T, Kusakabe T, Ishii Y, Itoi E. Dynamic change of dural sac cross-sectional area in axial loaded magnetic resonance imaging correlates with the severity of clinical symptoms in patients with lumbar spinal canal stenosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2012 Feb 1;37(3):207-13. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3182134e73.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
12589613
Citation
Kerrigan DC, Xenopoulos-Oddsson A, Sullivan MJ, Lelas JJ, Riley PO. Effect of a hip flexor-stretching program on gait in the elderly. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2003 Jan;84(1):1-6. doi: 10.1053/apmr.2003.50056.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
16484408
Citation
Kobayashi S, Uchida K, Takeno K, Baba H, Suzuki Y, Hayakawa K, Yoshizawa H. Imaging of cauda equina edema in lumbar canal stenosis by using gadolinium-enhanced MR imaging: experimental constriction injury. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2006 Feb;27(2):346-53.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
19404172
Citation
Koc Z, Ozcakir S, Sivrioglu K, Gurbet A, Kucukoglu S. Effectiveness of physical therapy and epidural steroid injections in lumbar spinal stenosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2009 May 1;34(10):985-9. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31819c0a6b.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
17967201
Citation
Konno S, Kikuchi S, Tanaka Y, Yamazaki K, Shimada Y, Takei H, Yokoyama T, Okada M, Kokubun S. A diagnostic support tool for lumbar spinal stenosis: a self-administered, self-reported history questionnaire. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2007 Oct 30;8:102. doi: 10.1186/1471-2474-8-102.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
23830297
Citation
Kreiner DS, Shaffer WO, Baisden JL, Gilbert TJ, Summers JT, Toton JF, Hwang SW, Mendel RC, Reitman CA; North American Spine Society. An evidence-based clinical guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis (update). Spine J. 2013 Jul;13(7):734-43. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2012.11.059.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
16181953
Citation
Lee LW, Zavarei K, Evans J, Lelas JJ, Riley PO, Kerrigan DC. Reduced hip extension in the elderly: dynamic or postural? Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2005 Sep;86(9):1851-4. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2005.03.008.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
26727925
Citation
Lurie J, Tomkins-Lane C. Management of lumbar spinal stenosis. BMJ. 2016 Jan 4;352:h6234. doi: 10.1136/bmj.h6234.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
23886845
Citation
Macedo LG, Hum A, Kuleba L, Mo J, Truong L, Yeung M, Battie MC. Physical therapy interventions for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis: a systematic review. Phys Ther. 2013 Dec;93(12):1646-60. doi: 10.2522/ptj.20120379. Epub 2013 Jul 25.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
19342935
Citation
Morishita Y, Hida S, Naito M, Arimizu J, Takamori Y. Neurogenic intermittent claudication in lumbar spinal canal stenosis: the clinical relationship between the local pressure of the intervertebral foramen and the clinical findings in lumbar spinal canal stenosis. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2009 Apr;22(2):130-4. doi: 10.1097/BSD.0b013e318167b054.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
16504078
Citation
Murphy DR, Hurwitz EL, Gregory AA, Clary R. A non-surgical approach to the management of lumbar spinal stenosis: a prospective observational cohort study. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2006 Feb 23;7:16. doi: 10.1186/1471-2474-7-16.
Results Reference
background
Citation
Nee RJ, Butler D. Management of peripheral neuropathic pain: Integrating neurobiology, neurodynamics, and clinical evidence. Physical Therapy in Sport. 2006;7(1):36-49
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
1536018
Citation
Porter RW, Ward D. Cauda equina dysfunction. The significance of two-level pathology. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1992 Jan;17(1):9-15.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
17535143
Citation
Pua YH, Cai CC, Lim KC. Treadmill walking with body weight support is no more effective than cycling when added to an exercise program for lumbar spinal stenosis: a randomised controlled trial. Aust J Physiother. 2007;53(2):83-9. doi: 10.1016/s0004-9514(07)70040-5.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
12622485
Citation
Rademeyer I. Manual therapy for lumbar spinal stenosis: a comprehensive physical therapy approach. Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am. 2003 Feb;14(1):103-10, vii. doi: 10.1016/s1047-9651(02)00077-3.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
21116662
Citation
Schafer A, Hall T, Muller G, Briffa K. Outcomes differ between subgroups of patients with low back and leg pain following neural manual therapy: a prospective cohort study. Eur Spine J. 2011 Mar;20(3):482-90. doi: 10.1007/s00586-010-1632-2. Epub 2010 Dec 1.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
18552358
Citation
Sugioka T, Hayashino Y, Konno S, Kikuchi S, Fukuhara S. Predictive value of self-reported patient information for the identification of lumbar spinal stenosis. Fam Pract. 2008 Aug;25(4):237-44. doi: 10.1093/fampra/cmn031. Epub 2008 Jun 13.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
22365377
Citation
Tomkins-Lane CC, Holz SC, Yamakawa KS, Phalke VV, Quint DJ, Miner J, Haig AJ. Predictors of walking performance and walking capacity in people with lumbar spinal stenosis, low back pain, and asymptomatic controls. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2012 Apr;93(4):647-53. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2011.09.023. Epub 2012 Feb 23.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
12622484
Citation
Whitman JM, Flynn TW, Fritz JM. Nonsurgical management of patients with lumbar spinal stenosis: a literature review and a case series of three patients managed with physical therapy. Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am. 2003 Feb;14(1):77-101, vi-vii. doi: 10.1016/s1047-9651(02)00076-1.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
17047542
Citation
Whitman JM, Flynn TW, Childs JD, Wainner RS, Gill HE, Ryder MG, Garber MB, Bennett AC, Fritz JM. A comparison between two physical therapy treatment programs for patients with lumbar spinal stenosis: a randomized clinical trial. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2006 Oct 15;31(22):2541-9. doi: 10.1097/01.brs.0000241136.98159.8c.
Results Reference
background

Learn more about this trial

Physical Therapy Treatments, Including Neural Mobilization and Hip/Back Stretches for People Between 50-89 With Lumbar Spinal Stenosis and Leg Pain Provoked by Walking

We'll reach out to this number within 24 hrs