Lumbar spine traction: evaluation of effects and recommended application for treatment

Krause, Martín; Refshauge, Kathryn; Dessen, M.; Boland, Robert A.

doi:10.1054/math.2000.0235

Cited by 95 publications

(78 citation statements)

References 61 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…friction of the body on the table top), to deform the elastic elements of the intervertebral disc and produce a detectable change in the participants' stature. In fact, Krause et al 27 have proposed that small traction forces are insufficient to cause significant vertebral separation, since such forces are dissipated by the tissues surrounding the spine. Therefore, the use of relatively light loads (e.g.…”

Section: Stature Gainmentioning

confidence: 99%

Changes in stature during and after spinal traction in young male subjects

Rodacki¹,

Weidle²,

Fowler³

et al. 2007

Rev. bras. fisioter.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Spinal traction is a relatively popular procedure for increasing the intervertebral space by applying separating forces. The parameters of time and magnitude of the traction forces may influence the outcomes from this procedure and need to be investigated. The duration of the benefits derived from traction is unknown and needs to be determined so that physiotherapists can provide better and more effective treatments. Objective: This study analyzed the relationship between load magnitude and time during spinal traction in relation to stature variations. Traction effect duration was also analyzed. Method: Fifteen healthy male subjects (23.1 ± 5.77 years; 1.80 ± 0.17 m and 87.0 ± 9.6 kg) were assessed under three traction conditions (0, 30 and 60% of body weight, BW) of 42 minutes. Stature variation was used to determine intervertebral disc height variation. Stature was assessed every 7 minutes during traction of 42 minutes and every 5 minutes for 45 minutes after traction ceased. Results: 0 and 30% BW traction produced similar gains (6.09 ± 1.89 mm, 5.70 ± 1.88 mm, respectively; p>0.05), while these were smaller (p<0.05) than at 60% BW (7.01 ± 1.98 mm). Significant differences (p<0.05) between 60% BW and the other conditions occurred only after the 21 st minute. Stature loss after traction showed that the traction effects were transient and lasted for approximately one hour. This suggests that traction loads of 30% BW are insufficient to produce stature gains similar to those observed with 60% BW. Conclusion: Traction showed a short-duration transient effect. For this effect to be maintained, it must be repeated at one-hour intervals. Its use is questioned because of its transient nature.

show abstract

Section: Stature Gainmentioning

confidence: 99%

Changes in stature during and after spinal traction in young male subjects

Rodacki¹,

Weidle²,

Fowler³

et al. 2007

Rev. bras. fisioter.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…More importantly, there was no study concerning the pre-treatment fearavoidance status of subjects, which is increasingly considered as essential factor in musculoskeletal rehabilitation. The literature review based on few current available studies suggests that traction was most likely to benefit patients with acute (less than 6 weeks' duration) and radicular pain with concomitant neurological deficit [24], and absence of centralization with movement testing [8]. However, the above statement carries rather weak research power.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, the above statement carries rather weak research power. Thus, the subgroup of patients most likely to benefit has not been specifically studied yet [24].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A clinical prediction rule for classifying patients with low back pain who demonstrate short-term improvement with mechanical lumbar traction

2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The objective of the study was to develop a clinical prediction rule for identifying patients with low back pain, who improved with mechanical lumbar traction. A prospective, cohort study was conducted in a physiotherapy clinic at a local hospital. Patients with low back pain, referred to physiotherapy were included in the study. The intervention was a standardized mechanical lumbar traction program, which comprised three sessions provided within 9 days. Patient demographic information, standard physical examination, numeric pain scale, fear-avoidance beliefs questionnaire and Oswestry low back pain disability index (pre-and post-intervention) were recorded. A total of 129 patients participated in the study and 25 had positive response to the mechanical lumbar traction. A clinical prediction rule with four variables (non-involvement of manual work, low level fear-avoidance beliefs, no neurological deficit and age above 30 years) was identified. The presence of all four variables (positive likelihood ratio = 9.36) increased the probability of response rate with mechanical lumbar traction from 19.4 to 69.2%. It appears that patients with low back pain who were likely to respond to mechanical lumbar traction may be identified.

show abstract

“…Spinal traction is generally regarded as a conservative management in treating various types of neck or back disorders. Several mechanisms have been proposed for the possible therapeutic effects of traction [5,10,17,21,27,28,36]. DeLacerda et al [5] reported that the axial traction reduced pain by improving circulation or preventing adhesions and contractures of spinal structures.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Wong et al [36] observed that the traction significantly decreased the electromyographic activity of paraspinal muscles during the whole traction phase. Krause et al [17] concluded that the separation of vertebrae by increasing the diameter of intervertebral foramen could reduce radicular pain and normalize neurological deficits by relieving direct pressure or contact forces in the sensitized neural tissues. Although the exact mechanisms for pain relief and function recovery are still controversial, the generally recognized biomechanical effects of cervical traction are to enlarge the intervertebral disc spaces around foramen levels and tighten the posterior longitudinal ligament [17,21,27,28,36].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of the intervertebral disc spaces between axial and anterior lean cervical traction

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The insufficient investigations on the changes of spinal structures during traction prevent further exploring the possible therapeutic mechanism of cervical traction. A blind randomized crossover-design study was conducted to quantitatively compare the intervertebral disc spaces between axial and anterior lean cervical traction in sitting position. A total of 96 radiographic images from the baseline measurements, axial and anterior lean tractions in 32 asymptomatic subjects were digitized for further analysis. The intra-and inter-examiner reliabilities for measuring the intervertebral disc spaces were in good ranges (ICCs = 0.928-0.942). With the application of anterior lean traction, the statistical increases were detected both in anterior and in posterior disc spaces compared to the baseline (0.29 mm and 0.24 mm; both P \ 0.01) and axial traction (0.16 mm and 0.35 mm; both P \ 0.01). The greater intervertebral disc spaces obtained during anterior lean traction might be associated with the more even distribution of traction forces over the anterior and posterior neck structures. The neck extension moment through mandible that generally occurred in the axial traction could be counteracted by the downward force of head weight during anterior lean traction. This study quantitatively demonstrated that anterior lean traction in sitting position provided more intervertebral disc space enlargements in both anterior and posterior aspects than axial traction did. These findings may serve as a therapeutic reference when cervical traction is suggested.

show abstract

Lumbar spine traction: evaluation of effects and recommended application for treatment

Cited by 95 publications

References 61 publications

Changes in stature during and after spinal traction in young male subjects

Changes in stature during and after spinal traction in young male subjects

A clinical prediction rule for classifying patients with low back pain who demonstrate short-term improvement with mechanical lumbar traction

Comparison of the intervertebral disc spaces between axial and anterior lean cervical traction

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About