Comparative Study on SNAG From Different Positions Low Back Pain Treatment
1 other identifier
interventional
59
1 country
1
Brief Summary
Objectives: To compare the effects of lumbar sustained natural apophyseal glides (SNAGs) applied in loaded versus unloaded positions on pain, disability, and function in individuals with chronic nonspecific LBP. Methods: A sample of 59 participants was assigned to receive six sessions of standard intervention, with lumbar SNAGs applied in either a loaded (sitting) or an unloaded (quadruped) position. This study was conducted between November 2025 and May 2026. Outcomes measured pre- and post-intervention included pain intensity (VAS), lumbar flexion range of motion (BROM device), and functional disability (Oswestry Disability Index).
Trial Health
Trial Health Score
Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach
participants targeted
Target at P25-P50 for not_applicable
Started Oct 2025
Shorter than P25 for not_applicable
1 active site
Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.
Trial Relationships
Click on a node to explore related trials.
Study Timeline
Key milestones and dates
First Submitted
Initial submission to the registry
October 2, 2025
CompletedFirst Posted
Study publicly available on registry
October 10, 2025
CompletedStudy Start
First participant enrolled
October 15, 2025
CompletedPrimary Completion
Last participant's last visit for primary outcome
May 30, 2026
CompletedStudy Completion
Last participant's last visit for all outcomes
May 30, 2026
CompletedSeptember 9, 2026
September 1, 2026
8 months
October 2, 2025
September 4, 2026
Conditions
Keywords
Outcome Measures
Primary Outcomes (2)
Pain intensity
Visual analogue scale (VAS), which is a 10-cm line, 0 denotes no pain and 10 the most intense agony.
1 week
Lumbar flexion ROM
The BROM is an electronic goniometer that will be used to evaluate the range of motion for trunk flexion
1 week
Secondary Outcomes (1)
Functional disability
1 week
Study Arms (2)
Loaded-SNAG
ACTIVE COMPARATORSNAGs from standing position
Unloaded-SNAG
ACTIVE COMPARATORSNAG from quadruped position
Interventions
patients will receive SNAGs from standing (Loaded-SNAG), step-stance, or functional position that provokes symptoms. A specialized Mulligan belt was used around the patient's waist and the therapist's hips. The mobilizing force was applied parallel to the facet joint plane (cephalic direction) and over the spinous processes of the respective symptomatic spinal levels. The therapist's hand's ulnar aspect was used over the spinous process of the superior vertebra of the involved segment for flexion glide. The therapist applies accessory glide to targeted zygapophyseal level while the patient actively performs symptomatic movement (e.g., forward flexion), performing repetitions with the therapist maintaining the glide.
patients will receive unloaded SNAG from quadruped position to reduce the axial loading. The therapist applies the equivalent accessory glide at the symptomatic spinal level while the patient performs the symptomatic movement (modified to be non-weight-bearing).
Eligibility Criteria
You may qualify if:
- Chronic non specific low back pain for 6 weeks or more
- Who scored between three and six on a visual analogue scale (VAS)
- Restriction of the movement was only in flexion ROM
You may not qualify if:
- Pregnancy,
- Obese,
- Infectious conditions of the spine,
- Autoimmune disorders,
- Malignancy
- Any contraindication to physiotherapy and manual therapy
- Any patient received physical therapy sessions last 6 months
Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.
Sponsors & Collaborators
Study Sites (1)
University Medical Clinics
Ha'il, 0000, Saudi Arabia
Study Design
- Study Type
- interventional
- Phase
- not applicable
- Allocation
- RANDOMIZED
- Masking
- SINGLE
- Who Masked
- OUTCOMES ASSESSOR
- Masking Details
- Participants were randomized into either the SNAG-loaded Group or the SNAG-unloaded Group. Randomisation was performed using the permuted blocks method. The allocation process was conducted by a coworker who was not involved in either the assessment or intervention procedures. The outcome assessor was blinded to group allocation. Participants could not be blinded due to the nature of the interventions. The therapist was not blinded for practical reasons. Statistical analysis was performed by an independent analyst blinded to group assignment using coded group identifiers (A and B).
- Purpose
- TREATMENT
- Intervention Model
- PARALLEL
- Sponsor Type
- OTHER
- Responsible Party
- PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
- PI Title
- Assistant Professor
Study Record Dates
First Submitted
October 2, 2025
First Posted
October 10, 2025
Study Start
October 15, 2025
Primary Completion
May 30, 2026
Study Completion
May 30, 2026
Last Updated
September 9, 2026
Record last verified: 2026-09
Data Sharing
- IPD Sharing
- Will not share
The project is supervised by university of Hail and all the data should be authorized through it