The Effects of Stretching Versus Static and Dynamic Cupping on Lumbar Range of Motion

NCT04230850 | Completed

• 1 other identifier: Pro00092733
• Study Type: interventional
• Target: 45
• Locations: 1 country
• Sites: 1

Brief Summary

The objective of this study is to fill gaps in the literature regarding the effectiveness of cupping therapy on lumbar stiffness. Participants will be recruited from the University of South Carolina and from local clinics in Columbia, South Carolina. Individuals will be classified based on lumbar range of motion limitations, and then they will be equally dispersed into three treatment groups via stratified randomization. These groups include dynamic cupping, static cupping, or stretching. All participants will be assessed prior to selected treatment to obtain baseline values for four measures: back range of motion (BROM), pain pressure threshold (PPT), active straight leg raise (ASLR), and numeric pain rating scale (NPRS). Participants will be given each measure directly after treatment, followed by a follow-up measurement 24 hours after treatment.

Conditions

Stiffness; Spine

Keywords

Cupping therapy on lumbar stiffness

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (1)

• Back Range of Motion

  The BROM instrument will be used to measure lumbar range of motion in individuals with lumbar stiffness at initial baseline, the change in range of motion immediately following treatment, and any maintained change at 24 hour follow up.

  At baseline, immediately following treatment, 24-hour follow up

Secondary Outcomes (3)

• Active Straight Leg Raise

  At baseline, immediately following treatment, 24-hour follow up

• Pain Pressure Threshold

  At baseline, immediately following treatment, 24-hour follow up

• Numeric Pain Rating Scale

  At baseline, immediately following treatment, 24-hour follow up

Study Arms (3)

Mildly Impaired Group

ACTIVE COMPARATOR

This group will consist of participants with 35-50 degrees of lumbar flexion.

Other: Static Cupping; Other: Dynamic Cupping; Other: Stretching

Moderately Impaired Group

ACTIVE COMPARATOR

This group will consist of participants with 20-34 degrees of lumbar flexion.

Other: Static Cupping; Other: Dynamic Cupping; Other: Stretching

Highly Impaired Group

ACTIVE COMPARATOR

This group will consist of participants with less than 20 degrees of lumbar flexion.

Other: Static Cupping; Other: Dynamic Cupping; Other: Stretching

Interventions

Static Cupping OTHER

Two cups will be applied unilaterally to the lumbar paraspinals. The skin will be elevated to 1.5 cm ensuring standardized pressure. Cups will remain on the treatment area statically for 4 minutes prior to removal. Another 4 minute bout of identical treatment to the contralateral side will follow. (Participants will be equally dispersed into three treatment groups via stratified randomization).

Highly Impaired Group; Mildly Impaired Group; Moderately Impaired Group

Dynamic Cupping OTHER

One cup will be applied ipsilaterally, raising skin to 1.2 cm of standard pressure. The cup will be continuously moved in a sweeping motion between L1 and L5 within a defined width. This process will be repeated on the other side. Each side will be treated for 4 minutes dynamically for a total treatment duration of 8 minutes. (Participants will be equally dispersed into three treatment groups via stratified randomization).

Highly Impaired Group; Mildly Impaired Group; Moderately Impaired Group

Stretching OTHER

The stretching program performed will involve a double knee to chest stretch, cat stretch, camel stretch, and pelvic tilts. Participants will receive a 30 second rest break between each of the four stretches. (Participants will be equally dispersed into three treatment groups via stratified randomization).

Highly Impaired Group; Mildly Impaired Group; Moderately Impaired Group

Eligibility Criteria

• Age: 18 Years+
• Sex: all
• Healthy Volunteers: Yes
• Age Groups: Adult (18-64), Older Adult (65+)

You may qualify if:

• years or older, 50 degrees or less of lumbar flexion

You may not qualify if:

• Cancer, organ failure, collagen disorders, deep vein thrombosis, pacemakers, bleeding disorders, recent fever

Sponsors & Collaborators

• University of South Carolina: lead

Study Sites (1)

University of South Carolina

Columbia, South Carolina, 29205, United States

Location

Related Publications (26)

• Rozenfeld E, Kalichman L. New is the well-forgotten old: The use of dry cupping in musculoskeletal medicine. J Bodyw Mov Ther. 2016 Jan;20(1):173-178. doi: 10.1016/j.jbmt.2015.11.009. Epub 2015 Dec 1.

  PMID: 26891653 BACKGROUND

• Markowski A, Sanford S, Pikowski J, Fauvell D, Cimino D, Caplan S. A pilot study analyzing the effects of Chinese cupping as an adjunct treatment for patients with subacute low back pain on relieving pain, improving range of motion, and improving function. J Altern Complement Med. 2014 Feb;20(2):113-7. doi: 10.1089/acm.2012.0769. Epub 2013 Dec 3.

  PMID: 24299469 BACKGROUND

• Shum GL, Crosbie J, Lee RY. Symptomatic and asymptomatic movement coordination of the lumbar spine and hip during an everyday activity. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2005 Dec 1;30(23):E697-702. doi: 10.1097/01.brs.0000188255.10759.7a.

  PMID: 16319739 BACKGROUND

• Coyle PC, Velasco T, Sions JM, Hicks GE. Lumbar Mobility and Performance-Based Function: An Investigation in Older Adults with and without Chronic Low Back Pain. Pain Med. 2017 Jan 1;18(1):161-168. doi: 10.1093/pm/pnw136.

  PMID: 27346888 BACKGROUND

• Clarkson, H. M. (2013). Musculoskeletal assessment: Joint motion and muscle testing (3rd ed.). Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer & Lippincot Williams & Wilkins.

  BACKGROUND

• Kuo YL, Tully EA, Galea MP. Kinematics of sagittal spine and lower limb movement in healthy older adults during sit-to-stand from two seat heights. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2010 Jan 1;35(1):E1-7. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181c47a0e.

  PMID: 20042941 BACKGROUND

• Meucci RD, Fassa AG, Faria NM. Prevalence of chronic low back pain: systematic review. Rev Saude Publica. 2015;49:1. doi: 10.1590/S0034-8910.2015049005874. Epub 2015 Oct 20.

  PMID: 26487293 BACKGROUND

• Yang H, Haldeman S, Lu ML, Baker D. Low Back Pain Prevalence and Related Workplace Psychosocial Risk Factors: A Study Using Data From the 2010 National Health Interview Survey. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2016 Sep;39(7):459-472. doi: 10.1016/j.jmpt.2016.07.004. Epub 2016 Aug 25.

  PMID: 27568831 BACKGROUND

• Thiese MS, Hegmann KT, Wood EM, Garg A, Moore JS, Kapellusch JM, Foster J, Greene T, Stoddard G, Biggs J; BackWords Study Team. Low-back pain ratings for lifetime, 1-month period, and point prevalences in a large occupational population. Hum Factors. 2014 Feb;56(1):86-97. doi: 10.1177/0018720813493641.

  PMID: 24669545 BACKGROUND

• Luckhaupt SE, Dahlhamer JM, Gonzales GT, Lu ML, Groenewold M, Sweeney MH, Ward BW. Prevalence, Recognition of Work-Relatedness, and Effect on Work of Low Back Pain Among U.S. Workers. Ann Intern Med. 2019 Aug 20;171(4):301-304. doi: 10.7326/M18-3602. Epub 2019 May 14.

  PMID: 31083729 BACKGROUND

• Hartvigsen J, Hancock MJ, Kongsted A, Louw Q, Ferreira ML, Genevay S, Hoy D, Karppinen J, Pransky G, Sieper J, Smeets RJ, Underwood M; Lancet Low Back Pain Series Working Group. What low back pain is and why we need to pay attention. Lancet. 2018 Jun 9;391(10137):2356-2367. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)30480-X. Epub 2018 Mar 21.

  PMID: 29573870 BACKGROUND

• Delitto A, George SZ, Van Dillen L, Whitman JM, Sowa G, Shekelle P, Denninger TR, Godges JJ; Orthopaedic Section of the American Physical Therapy Association. Low back pain. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2012 Apr;42(4):A1-57. doi: 10.2519/jospt.2012.42.4.A1. Epub 2012 Mar 30.

  PMID: 22466247 BACKGROUND

• Kisner, C., Colby, L. A., & Borstad, J. (2017). Therapeutic exercise: Foundations and techniques. Fa Davis.

  BACKGROUND

• Nelson RT, Bandy WD. Eccentric Training and Static Stretching Improve Hamstring Flexibility of High School Males. J Athl Train. 2004 Sep;39(3):254-258.

  PMID: 15496995 BACKGROUND

• Page P. Current concepts in muscle stretching for exercise and rehabilitation. Int J Sports Phys Ther. 2012 Feb;7(1):109-19.

  PMID: 22319684 BACKGROUND

• Bandy WD, Irion JM, Briggler M. The effect of time and frequency of static stretching on flexibility of the hamstring muscles. Phys Ther. 1997 Oct;77(10):1090-6. doi: 10.1093/ptj/77.10.1090.

  PMID: 9327823 BACKGROUND

• Roussel NA, Nijs J, Truijen S, Smeuninx L, Stassijns G. Low back pain: clinimetric properties of the Trendelenburg test, active straight leg raise test, and breathing pattern during active straight leg raising. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2007 May;30(4):270-8. doi: 10.1016/j.jmpt.2007.03.001.

  PMID: 17509436 BACKGROUND

• Breum J, Wiberg J, Bolton JE. Reliability and concurrent validity of the BROM II for measuring lumbar mobility. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 1995 Oct;18(8):497-502.

  PMID: 8583171 BACKGROUND

• Phattharasupharerk, S., Purepong, N., & Siriphorn, A. Inter-and Intra-Rater Reliability of the Back Range of Motion Instrument (BROM II) for Measuring Lumbar Mobility in Persons with Sedentary Lifestyle.

  BACKGROUND

• Fischer AA. Pressure algometry over normal muscles. Standard values, validity and reproducibility of pressure threshold. Pain. 1987 Jul;30(1):115-126. doi: 10.1016/0304-3959(87)90089-3.

  PMID: 3614975 BACKGROUND

• Potter, L., McCarthy. C., Oldham, J. Algometer reliability in measuring pain thresholds over normal spinal muscles to allow quantification of anti-nociceptive treatment effects. International Journal of Osteopathic Medicine, 9 (2006), pp. 113-119.

  BACKGROUND

• Nussbaum EL, Downes L. Reliability of clinical pressure-pain algometric measurements obtained on consecutive days. Phys Ther. 1998 Feb;78(2):160-9. doi: 10.1093/ptj/78.2.160.

  PMID: 9474108 BACKGROUND

• Liebenson C, Karpowicz AM, Brown SH, Howarth SJ, McGill SM. The active straight leg raise test and lumbar spine stability. PM R. 2009 Jun;1(6):530-5. doi: 10.1016/j.pmrj.2009.03.007.

  PMID: 19627942 BACKGROUND

• Gajdosik RL, LeVeau BF, Bohannon RW. Effects of ankle dorsiflexion on active and passive unilateral straight leg raising. Phys Ther. 1985 Oct;65(10):1478-82. doi: 10.1093/ptj/65.10.1478.

  PMID: 4048283 BACKGROUND

• 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.

  PMID: 15928561 BACKGROUND

• Chen HM, Wang HH, Chen CH, Hu HM. Effectiveness of a stretching exercise program on low back pain and exercise self-efficacy among nurses in Taiwan: a randomized clinical trial. Pain Manag Nurs. 2014 Mar;15(1):283-91. doi: 10.1016/j.pmn.2012.10.003. Epub 2012 Dec 23.

  PMID: 23266331 BACKGROUND

Study Officials

• Cathy Arnot, DPT

  University of South Carolina

  PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR

Study Design

• Study Type: interventional
• Phase: not applicable
• Allocation: RANDOMIZED
• Masking: DOUBLE
• Who Masked: INVESTIGATOR, OUTCOMES ASSESSOR
• Masking Details: The people collecting the data will not be aware of which intervention group the subjects were allocated to.
• Purpose: TREATMENT
• Intervention Model: PARALLEL
• Sponsor Type: OTHER
• Responsible Party: PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
• PI Title: Clinical Associate Professor

Model Details: A parallel design typically compares two or more treatments. Participants are randomly assigned to one of the groups, treatments are administered, and then the results are compared. In this study, individuals will be placed in one of three groups: static stretching group, dynamic cupping group, or stretching group.

Study Record Dates

• First Submitted: December 12, 2019
• First Posted: January 18, 2020
• Study Start: January 20, 2020
• Primary Completion: June 1, 2020
• Study Completion: September 1, 2020
• Last Updated: November 16, 2020

Record last verified: 2020-11

Data Sharing

• IPD Sharing: Will not share

Locations

US (1)