Short-Term Benefits from Manual Therapy as an Adjunct Treatment for Persistent Postural-Perceptual Dizziness Symptoms: A Preliminary Prospective Case Series.

Persistent dizziness and balance deficits are common, often with unknown etiology. Persistent Postural-Perceptual Dizziness (3PD) is a relatively new diagnosis with symptoms that may include dizziness, unsteadiness, or non-vertiginous dizziness and be persistent the majority of time over a minimum of 90 days. The purpose of this case series was to investigate short-term outcomes of reducing dizziness symptoms using a manual therapy intervention focused on restoring mobility in the fascia using a pragmatically applied biomechanical approach, the Fascial Manipulation® method (FM®), in patients with 3PD. The preliminary prospective case series consisted of twelve (n = 12) patients with persistent complaints of dizziness who received systematic application of manual therapy to improve fascial mobility after previously receiving vestibular rehabilitation. The manual therapy consisted of strategic assessment and palpation based on the model proposed in the FM® Stecco Method. This model utilizes tangential oscillations directed toward the deep fascia at strategic points. Six males (n = 6) and females (n = 6) were included with a mean age of 68.3 ± 19.3 years. The average number of interventions was 4.5 ± 0.5. Nonparametric paired sample t-tests were performed. Significant improvements were observed toward the resolution of symptoms and improved outcomes. The metrics included the Dizziness Handicap Inventory and static and dynamic balance measures. The Dizziness Handicap Inventory scores decreased (i.e., improved) by 43.6 points (z = -3.1 and p = 0.002). The timed up and go scores decreased (i.e., improved) by 3.2 s (z = -2.8 and p = 0.005). The tandem left increased (i.e., improved) by 8.7 s (z = 2.8 and p = 0.005) and the tandem right increased (i.e., improved) by 7.5 s (z = 2.8 and p = 0.005). Four to five manual therapy treatment sessions appear to be effective for short-term improvements in dizziness complaints and balance in those with 3PD. These results should be interpreted with caution as future research using rigorous methods and a control group must be conducted.

Fascial manipulation vs. standard physical therapy practice for low back pain diagnoses: A pragmatic study.

BACKGROUND: Connective tissue mobility alters motor unit recruitment, but the restoration of fascial mobility allows for optimal motor function. The Fascial Manipulation® (FM®) method is a multiplanar approach that assesses and treats the mobility of deep fascia in specific anatomical locations where motor units converge. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of FM® vs. standard physical therapy treatment (SPT) in patients with low back pain (LBP). DESIGN: Six-months controlled clinical trial. METHOD: 102 participants with LBP received SPT or FM®. Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS), 15- point Global Rating of Change (GROC), and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) were used to monitor progress. RESULTS: The FM® group had a significantly lower ODI (p < 0.009) and NPS scores (p < 0.0001) and significantly higher GROC scores (p < 0.003) once their means were adjusted for initial scores. When comparing the SPT to FM®, the final ODI decreased by at least 1 category in 48.9% of the SPT cases, while in 36.2% of the cases was no change. ODI minimal clinical importance difference (MCID) change of 10% decrease in scores occurred in 70.2% of the SPT group compared to 96% of the FM® group (p = 0.003). ODI MCID change of 50% decrease in scores occurred in 40% of the SPT group compared to 64.6% of the FM® group (p = 0.02) 44.7% of the participants in the SPT group had final GROC values above +5 at discharge, compared to 92% of the participants from the FM® group (p = 0.0001). The FM® subjects had almost three times the change in NPRS compared to SPT counterparts (-4.3 ±â€¯2.2 to -1.5  ± 2.4, p=0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: FM® appears to improve NPRS, GROC, and ODI more than SPT. FM® may provide an effective treatment technique for LBP.

A commentary review of the cost effectiveness of manual therapies for neck and low back pain.

BACKGROUND & PURPOSE: Neck and low back pain (NLBP) are global health problems, which diminish quality of life and consume vast economic resources. Cost effectiveness in healthcare is the minimal amount spent to obtain acceptable outcomes. Studies on manual therapies often fail to identify which manual therapy intervention or combinations with other interventions is the most cost effective. The purpose of this commentary is to sample the dialogue within the literature on the cost effectiveness of evidence-based manual therapies with a particular focus on the neck and low back regions. METHODS: This commentary identifies and presents the available literature on the cost effectiveness of manual therapies for NLBP. Key words searched were neck and low back pain, cost effectiveness, and manual therapy to select evidence-based articles. Eight articles were identified and presented for discussion. RESULTS: The lack of homogeneity, in the available literature, makes difficult any valid comparison among the various cost effectiveness studies. DISCUSSION: Potential outcome bias in each study is dependent upon the lens through which it is evaluated. If evaluated from a societal perspective, the conclusion slants toward "adequate" interventions in an effort to decrease costs rather than toward the most efficacious interventions with the best outcomes. When cost data are assessed according to a healthcare (or individual) perspective, greater value is placed on quality of life, the patient's beliefs, and the "willingness to pay."