Adv Biomed Res. 2025 Aug 26;14:80. doi: 10.4103/abr.abr_318_23. eCollection 2025.

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Low back pain (LBP) is a socioeconomic burden worldwide and a major contributor to healthcare costs. Mobilization and dry needling (DN) are well-known treatments for LBP, and both of them, as a part of treatment, can relieve LBP. Due to the importance of choosing interventions with greater effects on patients’ recovery, in this study we intend to compare DN and lumbar spine mobilization, as complementary therapies in combination with routine physiotherapy in the treatment of patients with chronic nonspecific LBP (CNLBP).

MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study is a two-arm randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, controlled trial comparing DN to lumbar spine mobilization in individuals (n = 56; 18-45 years of age) with CNLBP. The experimental group will receive DN plus sham mobilization, and the control group will receive Maitland mobilization plus sham DN (eight treatment sessions in 4 weeks). The primary outcome is functional disability, and the secondary outcomes are pain, lumbar multifidus (LM) and quadratus lumborum (QL) function, lumbar range of motion (ROM), pain pressure threshold (PPT).

RESULTS: The results of this protocol study provide information on the comparison between the effects of two complementary therapies, DN and mobilization, in people with chronic nonspecific LBP.

CONCLUSION: In this study, we intend to solve the methodological problems of the previous study in this field. The results of this study allow the therapist to choose an intervention that may have more therapeutic effects in combination with routine physiotherapy in the treatment of CNLBP.

TRIAL REGISTRATION: 1) ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05214456) and 2) IRCT.ir (IRCT20210706051802N1).

PMID:40958926 | PMC:PMC12435766 | DOI:10.4103/abr.abr_318_23