Summary: Most patients experiencing low back pain benefit from physical therapy. However, a new study suggests that those experiencing low back pain along with hip pain would benefit more from hip-focused physical therapy. Hip-focused physical therapy results in better pain relief than spine-focused physical therapy.
Low back pain is among the most common chronic pain syndromes. The majority of adults would experience low back pain during their lifetime. However, such pain is also very challenging to manage, as it occurs for diverse reasons.
Thus, for example, in some, it may occur due to sprains and strains, in others due to disc degeneration, and in others due to the weakness of supporting musculature. Not only that but in many, it may occur secondary to mood disorders or even due to certain neurological conditions.
A condition as diverse as low back pain is best managed by combining various treatment modalities. Using painkillers in the condition is not enough. In many, even opioids or other addon drugs may not provide sufficient relief. Thus, even non-pharmacological means have a special place in low back pain management. Therefore, many may benefit from different physical therapies.
New Study Shows That Hip-Focused Physical Therapy May Help with Low Back Pain
This new study published in The Lancet Rheumatology aimed to evaluate the benefits of hip-focused physical therapy compared to spine-focused physical therapy in older adults suffering from chronic low back pain, hip pain, and hip muscle weakness. The motivation for the study stems from previous findings that indicated older adults with combined low back and hip issues have worse functional outcomes and a higher risk of mobility decline compared to those with only low back pain.
This randomized controlled trial included 184 participants aged between 60 and 85 years. Participants were randomly assigned to either the hip-focused or spine-focused physical therapy groups. After 8-weeks, researchers assessed the benefits of various treatment regimes in the patients.
Interestingly, the study found that hip-focused physical therapy was much more effective than low-back-focused physical therapy. This suggests that participants receiving hip-focused therapy experienced greater reductions in lower back pain-related disability compared to those receiving spine-focused therapy. Although both groups reported similar improvement in functionality, confirming that both methods are equally good for enhancing mobility.
Both approaches are equally safe and do not cause side effects or harm. This study shows how challenging managing low back pain could be and that managing it requires a personalized approach. Hip-focused treatment is especially beneficial for those experiencing hip and lower back pain. Hip pain is commonly reported by those experiencing lower back pain.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the study provides promising evidence that tailored hip-focused physical therapy can significantly improve disability outcomes in older adults with coexisting low back and hip pain.
Of course, more studies are needed on the topic, such as understanding how to combine hip-focused physical therapy with other traditional methods. Similarly, it may be worth exploring what kind of physical therapies focusing on the hip work better.
Ultimately, this study also highlights the complex nature of chronic pain in those experiencing low back pain. It is vital to differentiate patients with low back pain complaining about hip pain from those not complaining about hip pain. It might be worth exploring if physical therapy focusing on the hip would help those experiencing low back pain without the involvement of a hip or not.
Source:
Hicks, G. E., George, S. Z., Pugliese, J. M., Coyle, P. C., Sions, J. M., Piva, S., Simon, C. B., Kakyomya, J., & Patterson, C. G. (2024). Hip-focused physical therapy versus spine-focused physical therapy for older adults with chronic low back pain at risk for mobility decline (MASH): A multicentre, single-masked, randomised controlled trial. The Lancet Rheumatology, 6(1), e10–e20. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2665-9913(23)00267-9
