The effect of sacroiliac joint manipulation compared to manipulation and static stretching of the posterior oblique sling group of muscles in participants with chronic sacroiliac joint syndrome

Abstract

Sacroiliac joint syndrome is diagnosed in patients who complain of various painful symptoms associated to their lower back, for example: hip and groin pain, sciatica pain, and / or a need to frequently urinate. They further report that their pain is further intensified when standing from sitting, stair walking, bending forward or from sitting or standing too long. Sacroiliac joint syndrome has been widely accepted by health professions as a contributor to low back pain. Spinal manipulation has shown to be an effective method for pain relief of this condition. Studies have been done using physical therapy in conjunction with manipulation in treating sacroiliac joint syndrome. However, little research has been done on the effects of static stretching and manipulation combined.

The posterior oblique sling group of muscles is created by the biceps femoris, gluteus maximus, erector spinae and latissimus dorsi muscles. The sacroiliac joint can be affected by the functional relationship of the posterior oblique sling muscles. These muscles are involved in forces across the sacroiliac joint. Tightness of muscles can affect the sacroiliac joint.

Flexibility is an essential element of normal biomechanical functioning. Flexibility of muscles, tendons and ligaments can influence a joints range of motion. There is evidence that suggests that stretching could increase a joint’s range of motion which was evident one or more days after the stretching protocol in people without clinically significant contractures. Upon review of the related literature, it appears that there is insufficient literature assessing the clinical effectiveness of static stretching of the posterior oblique muscle sling group with respect to sacroiliac joint syndrome. Therefore this study is aimed at providing insight into the role of the posterior oblique muscle sling group in participants with and chronic sacroiliac joint syndrome. It is hypothesized that effective treatment of these muscles will allow for a more effective outcome of symptoms.

The study design chosen was a randomised, clinical trial consisting of thirty voluntary participants’ between the ages 18 to 45 years suffering from chronic sacroiliac joint syndrome. There were two groups of fifteen participants, who received four treatment consultations within a two week period. Participants placed into Group One received sacroiliac joint manipulation only, while participants in Group Two received static stretching of the posterior oblique muscle sling and sacroiliac joint manipulation. Subjective and objective readings were taken at the first, third and fourth (final) consultations. The Numerical Pain Rating Scale (NRS) and the Oswestry Low Back Pain Disability Index (OSW) questionnaires were used to assess the subjective findings whilst the objective measurements were collected from results of algometer and inclinometer readings.

The intra-group analysis revealed there was a statistically significant improvement within both groups for NRS, OSW, and inclinometer results. It appeared that Group Two fared better in terms of the algometer (pressure) results. The inter-group analysis revealed that all comparisons apart from the algometer readings had no statistically significant improvement between the two groups. From the intra-group comparisons of the objective data, participants in both groups experienced a statistically significant improvement. However, Group Two fared better in terms of the algometric pressure readings (p = 0.001).

This study confirms that both treatment protocols were effective in reducing the signs and symptoms associated with sacroiliac joint syndrome. Although the readings were not statistically significant, there is evidence that Group Two responded better than Group One in terms of the algometer readings (Figure 4.13). There is insufficient literature on studies related to the posterior oblique sling muscles, and therefore, comparisons are needed with respect to the posterior oblique muscle sling group and its effects on the sacroiliac joint. This study concludes that overall there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups and recommends that further studies be undertaken with a greater number of participants to gauge if a more significant result can be achieved.