Massage for low‐back pain
Abstract
Background
Low‐back pain is one of the most common and costly musculoskeletal problems in modern society. Proponents of massage therapy claim it can minimize pain and disability, and speed return to normal function.
Objectives
To assess the effects of massage therapy for non‐specific low‐back pain.
Search methods
We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL from their beginning to May 2008. We also searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library 2006, issue 3), HealthSTAR and Dissertation abstracts up to 2006. There were no language restrictions. References in the included studies and in reviews of the literature were screened.
Selection criteria
The studies had to be randomized or quasi‐randomized trials investigating the use of any type of massage (using the hands or a mechanical device) as a treatment for non‐specific low‐back pain.
Data collection and analysis
Two review authors selected the studies, assessed the risk of bias using the criteria recommended by the Cochrane Back Review Group, and extracted the data using standardized forms. Both qualitative and meta‐analyses were performed.
Main results
Thirteen randomized trials were included. Eight had a high risk and five had a low risk of bias. One study was published in German and the rest in English. Massage was compared to an inert therapy (sham treatment) in two studies that showed that massage was superior for pain and function on both short and long‐term follow‐ups. In eight studies, massage was compared to other active treatments. They showed that massage was similar to exercises, and massage was superior to joint mobilization, relaxation therapy, physical therapy, acupuncture and self‐care education. One study showed that reflexology on the feet had no effect on pain and functioning. The beneficial effects of massage in patients with chronic low‐back pain lasted at least one year after the end of the treatment. Two studies compared two different techniques of massage. One concluded that acupuncture massage produces better results than classic (Swedish) massage and another concluded that Thai massage produces similar results to classic (Swedish) massage.
Authors' conclusions
Massage might be beneficial for patients with subacute and chronic non‐specific low‐back pain, especially when combined with exercises and education. The evidence suggests that acupuncture massage is more effective than classic massage, but this need confirmation. More studies are needed to confirm these conclusions, to assess the impact of massage on return‐to‐work, and to determine cost‐effectiveness of massage as an intervention for low‐back pain.
PICOs
Plain language summary
Massage for low‐back pain
Low‐back pain (LBP) is one of the most common and costly musculoskeletal problems in modern society. Seventy to 85% of the population will experience LBP at some time in their lives. Proponents of massage therapy claim it can minimize pain and disability, and speed return to normal function.
Massage in this review is defined as soft‐tissue manipulation using hands or a mechanical device on any body part. Non‐specific LBP indicates that no specific cause is detectable, such as infection, neoplasm, metastasis, osteoporosis, rheumatoid arthritis, fracture, inflammatory process or radicular syndrome (pain, tingling or numbnness spreading down the leg.
Thirteen randomized trials (1596 participants) assessing various types of massage therapy for low‐back pain were included in this review. Eight had a high risk and five had a low risk of bias. Massage was more likely to work when combined with exercises (usually stretching) and education. The amount of benefit was more than that achieved by joint mobilization, relaxation, physical therapy, self‐care education or acupuncture. It seems that acupressure or pressure point massage techniques provide more relief than classic (Swedish) massage, although more research is needed to confirm this.
No serious adverse events were reported by any patient in the included studies. However, some patients reported soreness during or shortly after the treatment. Some patients also reported an allergic reaction (e.g. rash or pimples) to the massage oil.
In summary, massage might be beneficial for patients with subacute (lasting four to 12 weeks) and chronic (lasting longer than 12 weeks) non‐specific low‐back pain, especially when combined with exercises and education.
