Home > Journals > European Journal of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine > Past Issues > Europa Medicophysica 2004 December;40(4) > Europa Medicophysica 2004 December;40(4):263-8



Publishing options
To subscribe
Submit an article
Recommend to your librarian





Europa Medicophysica 2004 December;40(4):263-8


language: English

Symptomatic efficacy of stabilizing treatment versus laser therapy for sub-acute low back pain with positive tests for sacroiliac dysfunction: a randomised clinical controlled trial with 1 year follow-up

Monticone M. 1, Barbarino A. 2, Testi C. 3, Arzano S. 4, Moschi A. 4, Negrini S. 1

1 ISICO, Italian Scientific Spine Institute, Milan, Italy 2 Rehabilitative Medical Center, Asti, Italy 3 Dynamic Orthopaedic Orthosis, TLM Ltd. Gerenzano (Varese), Italy 4 Department of Surgery, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy


Aim. Back pain is a highly frequent condition due to many causes, although most of them cannot be established with certainty. It is also the current clinical and scientific belief that sacroiliac joint syndrome can be a specific low back pain cause. Nonetheless the existence of clinical tests aimed at highlighting the responsibility for lumbar pain secondary to sacroiliac dysfunction, it is not easy to diagnose it with either manual or instrumental means. Moreover, uncertainty is diffuse when facing a correct treatment for patients involved. The aim of this study was to verify, in patients with acute or sub-acute low back pain and positive sacroiliac signs, the efficacy of a stabilising therapy (orthosis and exercises, with previous mesotherapy) directly targeted to sacroiliac dysfunction versus a symptomatic usual care such as He-Ne laser therapy.
Methods. Over a period of 14 months, we recruited 22 patients (10 females, mean age 44±11) with acute and sub-acute low back pain and symptoms and signs suggesting a sacroiliac dysfunction. They were randomised in a Group laser (GL), 11 patients treated with He-Ne laser therapy targeting the sacroiliac region, and a Group stabilisation (GS), 11 patients treated with mesotherapy, a specific dynamic sacroiliac support (ILSA) and specific exercises. Outcome criteria included VAS, and Mens and Laslett sacroiliac tests.
Results. Out of 449 acute and sub-acute low back pain out-patients, 22 (4.9%) had symptoms and signs suggesting a sacroiliac dysfunction. A reduction of pain was achieved only in the GS. All pain-provocation and stability tests were negative both after the end of treatment and at the follow-up only in the GS.
Conclusion. A targeted approach based on mesotherapy, a specific sacroiliac belt and specific stabilizing exercises proved its efficacy in acute and sub-acute low back pain patients with symptoms and signs suggesting a sacroiliac dysfunction. As soon as it will be possible to identify particular spine syndromes in the universe of non specific low back pain, there will also be the possibility to employ specific therapies.

top of page