Clinical trial NCT04230850: The Effects of Stretching Versus Static and Dynamic Cupping on Lumbar Range of Motion
Official title: The Effects of Stretching Versus Static and Dynamic Cupping on Lumbar Range of Motion
Study type: INTERVENTIONAL
Overall status: COMPLETED
Phase: NA
Conditions: Stiffness; Spine
Keywords: Cupping therapy on lumbar stiffness
Lead sponsor: University of South Carolina
Sponsor class: OTHER
First posted: 2020-01-18
Enrollment: 45
Sex: ALL
Minimum age (years): 18
Standard ages: ADULT
OLDER_ADULT
Accepts healthy volunteers: yes
Allocation: RANDOMIZED
Intervention model: PARALLEL
Intervention model description: 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.
Primary purpose: TREATMENT

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.

Detailed description: Cupping therapy has become recently popular in Western culture due to affordability, lack of invasiveness, and low risk of adverse effects. However, there is insufficient evidence of the effectiveness on this treatment technique on decreasing pain and increasing range of motion. This project aims to help fill the gaps by using a larger sample size and clear methodology.

The aims of the study include to determine if both static and dynamic cupping therapy have a greater effect on BROM, PPT, ASLR, and NRPS as compared to stretching, and if any changes made are maintained to a different degree over a 24 hour period based on treatment. Additional aims of the study include to determine if there is a difference between type of cupping (static vs dynamic) on these four measures. By performing this study, scientific knowledge of cupping therapy will be improved and expanded, thus impacting how it is used in clinical practice.

Eligibility criteria: Inclusion Criteria:

* 18 years or older, 50 degrees or less of lumbar flexion

Exclusion Criteria:

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

Primary outcomes:
measure: Back Range of Motion
timeFrame: At baseline, immediately following treatment, 24-hour follow up
Secondary outcomes:
measure: Active Straight Leg Raise
timeFrame: At baseline, immediately following treatment, 24-hour follow up
measure: Pain Pressure Threshold
timeFrame: At baseline, immediately following treatment, 24-hour follow up
measure: Numeric Pain Rating Scale
timeFrame: At baseline, immediately following treatment, 24-hour follow up
Other outcomes:
Locations:
city: Columbia
country: United States
facility: University of South Carolina
state: South Carolina
Study officials:
affiliation: University of South Carolina
name: Cathy Arnot, DPT
role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
References:
citation: 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.
citation: 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.
citation: 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.
citation: 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.
citation: Clarkson, H. M. (2013). Musculoskeletal assessment: Joint motion and muscle testing (3rd ed.). Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer & Lippincot Williams & Wilkins.
citation: 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.
citation: 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.
citation: 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.
citation: 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.
citation: 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.
citation: 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.
citation: 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.
citation: Kisner, C., Colby, L. A., & Borstad, J. (2017). Therapeutic exercise: Foundations and techniques. Fa Davis.
citation: 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.
citation: Page P. Current concepts in muscle stretching for exercise and rehabilitation. Int J Sports Phys Ther. 2012 Feb;7(1):109-19.
citation: 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.
citation: 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.
citation: 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.
citation: 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.
citation: 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.
citation: 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.
citation: 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.
citation: 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.
citation: 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.
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.
citation: 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.