Effectiveness of translational manipulation under interscalene block for the treatment of adhesive capsulitis of the shoulder: A nonrandomized clinical trial.

Study Design: Nonrandomized controlled trial. Objective: To determine whether translational manipulation under anesthesia/local block (TMUA) adds to the benefit of mobilization and range of motion exercise for improving pain and functional status among patients with adhesive capsulitis of the shoulder (AC). Background: TMUA has been shown to improve pain and dysfunction in patients with AC. This intervention has not been directly compared to physical therapy treatment without TMUA in a prospective trial. Methods: Sixteen consecutive patients with a primary diagnosis of AC were divided into two groups. Patients in the first (TMUA) group received a session of translational manipulation under interscalene block, followed by six sessions of manipulation and exercise. Patients in the comparison group received seven sessions of manipulation and exercise. Outcome measures taken at baseline and 3, 6, 12 months and 4 years included Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) scores. Four-year outcomes included percent of normal ratings, medication use, and activity limitations. Results: Both groups showed improved SPADI scores across all follow-up times compared to baseline. The TMUA group showed a greater improvement in SPADI scores than the comparison group at 3 weeks, with no significant differences in SPADI scores at other time points. However, at 4 years, significantly more subjects in the comparison group (5 of 8) had activity limitations versus subjects in the TMUA group (1 of 8). No subject experienced a complication from either intervention protocol. Conclusion: Physical therapy consisting of manual therapy and exercise provides benefit for patients with AC. Translational manipulation under local block may be a useful adjunct to manual therapy and exercise for patients with AC.

Implications of early and guideline adherent physical therapy for low back pain on utilization and costs.

BACKGROUND: Initial management decisions following a new episode of low back pain (LBP) are thought to have profound implications for health care utilization and costs. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of early and guideline adherent physical therapy for low back pain on utilization and costs within the Military Health System (MHS). METHODS: Patients presenting to a primary care setting with a new complaint of LBP from January 1, 2007 to December 31, 2009 were identified from the MHS Management Analysis and Reporting Tool. Descriptive statistics, utilization, and costs were examined on the basis of timing of referral to physical therapy and adherence to practice guidelines over a 2-year period. Utilization outcomes (advanced imaging, lumbar injections or surgery, and opioid use) were compared using adjusted odds ratios with 99% confidence intervals. Total LBP-related health care costs over the 2-year follow-up were compared using linear regression models. RESULTS: 753,450 eligible patients with a primary care visit for LBP between 18-60 years of age were considered. Physical therapy was utilized by 16.3% (n = 122,723) of patients, with 24.0% (n = 17,175) of those receiving early physical therapy that was adherent to recommendations for active treatment. Early referral to guideline adherent physical therapy was associated with significantly lower utilization for all outcomes and 60% lower total LBP-related costs. CONCLUSIONS: The potential for cost savings in the MHS from early guideline adherent physical therapy may be substantial. These results also extend the findings from similar studies in civilian settings by demonstrating an association between early guideline adherent care and utilization and costs in a single payer health system. Future research is necessary to examine which patients with LBP benefit early physical therapy and determine strategies for providing early guideline adherent care.

The impact of physical therapy residency or fellowship education on clinical outcomes for patients with musculoskeletal conditions.

STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective cohort design was conducted using data from an electronic survey and an existing commercial outcomes database. OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical outcomes of patients with musculoskeletal conditions treated by physical therapists who had completed residency or fellowship programs versus those who had not. BACKGROUND: There is an increasing focus on specialization through postprofessional education in physical therapy residency and fellowship programs. Scant evidence exists that evaluates the influence of postprofessional clinical education on actual patient outcomes. METHODS: Physical therapists using a national outcomes database were surveyed to determine their level of postprofessional education. Survey responders were categorized into 1 of 3 groups that included no residency or fellowship training, residency trained, or fellowship trained. Outcomes for 25 843 patients with musculoskeletal conditions treated by 363 therapists from June 2012 to June 2013 were extracted from the database. These data were analyzed to identify any differences in functional status change and efficiency achieved between the 3 groups. Potentially confounding variables were controlled for statistically. RESULTS: The fellowship-trained group of physical therapists achieved functional status changes and efficiency that were greater than those of the other groups. No difference in functional status change was observed between the residency group and the therapists without residency or fellowship training. The group without residency or fellowship training was more efficient than the residency-trained group. Fellowship-trained therapists were more likely to achieve greater treatment effect sizes than therapists without residency or fellowship training. Residency-trained therapists were less likely to achieve greater treatment effect sizes than the therapists without residency or fellowship training. CONCLUSION: These data demonstrate that fellowship training may contribute to statistically greater patient outcomes. Residency training did not appear to contribute to improved patient functional status change or efficiency. It is unknown whether the statistical differences observed would be clinically meaningful for patients.

A regional interdependence model of musculoskeletal dysfunction: research, mechanisms, and clinical implications.

The term 'regional interdependence' or RI has recently been introduced into the vernacular of physical therapy and rehabilitation literature as a clinical model of musculoskeletal assessment and intervention. The underlying premise of this model is that seemingly unrelated impairments in remote anatomical regions of the body may contribute to and be associated with a patient's primary report of symptoms. The clinical implication of this premise is that interventions directed at one region of the body will often have effects at remote and seeming unrelated areas. The formalized concept of RI is relatively new and was originally derived in an inductive manner from a variety of earlier publications and clinical observations. However, recent literature has provided additional support to the concept. The primary purpose of this article will be to further refine the operational definition for the concept of RI, examine supporting literature, discuss possible clinically relevant mechanisms, and conclude with a discussion of the implications of these findings on clinical practice and research.

Psychometric properties of selected tests in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: The psychometric properties of many outcome tools commonly used with patients with lumbar spinal stenosis have yet to be examined. PURPOSE: Examine the test-retest reliability, responsiveness, and minimum levels of detectable and clinically important differences for several outcome measures in a cohort of patients with lumbar spinal stenosis. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Cohort secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial of patients with lumbar spinal stenosis receiving outpatient physical therapy. PATIENT SAMPLE: Fifty-five patients (mean age, 69.5 years; standard deviation, ±7.9 years; 43.1% females) presenting with lumbar spinal stenosis to physical therapy. OUTCOME MEASURES: The Modified Oswestry Disability Index, Modified Swiss Spinal Stenosis Scale (SSS), Patient Specific Functional Scale, and Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS). METHODS: All patients completed the Oswestry Disability Index, SSS, Patient Specific Functional Scale, and NPRS at the baseline examination and at a follow-up. In addition, patients completed a 15-point Global Rating of Change at follow-up, which was used to categorize whether patients experienced clinically meaningful change. Changes in the Oswestry Disability Index, SSS, Patient Specific Functional Scale, and NPRS were then used to assess test-retest reliability, responsiveness, and minimum levels of detectable and clinically important differences. RESULTS: The Oswestry Disability Index was the only outcome measure to exhibit excellent test-retest reliability with an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.86 (95% confidence interval, 0.63-0.93). All others ranged between fair and moderate. The Oswestry Disability Index, SSS, and Patient Specific Functional Scale exhibited varying levels of responsiveness, each of which was superior to the NPRS. The minimal clinically important difference for the Oswestry Disability Index was five points, the SSS was 0.36 and 0.10 for symptoms subscale and functional subscale, respectively, 1.3 for the Patient Specific Functional Scale, and for the NPRS, 1.25 for back/buttock symptoms and 1.5 for thigh/leg symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: The results of our study indicate that the Oswestry Disability Index, SSS, and Patient Specific Functional Scale possess adequate psychometric properties to be used in the outcome assessment of patients with lumbar spinal stenosis. However, further investigation is needed to validate these findings in other samples of patients with lumbar spinal stenosis and nonspecific low back pain.

Primary care referral of patients with low back pain to physical therapy: impact on future health care utilization and costs.

STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective cohort. OBJECTIVE: To describe physical therapy utilization following primary care consultation for low back pain (LBP) and evaluate associations between the timing and content of physical therapy and subsequent health care utilization and costs. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Primary care management of LBP is highly variable and the implications for subsequent costs are not well understood. The importance of referring patients from primary care to physical therapy has been debated, and information on how the timing and content of physical therapy impact subsequent costs and utilization is needed. METHODS: Data were extracted from a national database of employer-sponsored health plans. A total of 32,070 patients with a new primary care LBP consultation were identified and categorized on the basis of the use of physical therapy within 90 days. Patients utilizing physical therapy were further categorized based on timing (early [within 14 d] or delayed)] and content (guideline adherent or nonadherent). LBP-related health care costs and utilization in the 18-months following primary care consultation were examined. RESULTS: Physical therapy utilization was 7.0% with significant geographic variability. Early physical therapy timing was associated with decreased risk of advanced imaging (odds ratio [OR] = 0.34, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.29, 0.41), additional physician visits (OR = 0.26, 95% CI: 0.21, 0.32), surgery (OR = 0.45, 95% CI: 0.32, 0.64), injections (OR = 0.42, 95% CI: 0.32, 0.64), and opioid medications (OR = 0.78, 95% CI: 0.66, 0.93) compared with delayed physical therapy. Total medical costs for LBP were $2736.23 lower (95% CI: 1810.67, 3661.78) for patients receiving early physical therapy. Physical therapy content showed weaker associations with subsequent care. CONCLUSION: Early physical therapy following a new primary care consultation was associated with reduced risk of subsequent health care compared with delayed physical therapy. Further research is needed to clarify exactly which patients with LBP should be referred to physical therapy; however, if referral is to be made, delaying the initiation of physical therapy may increase risk for additional health care consumption and costs.

The addition of cervical thrust manipulations to a manual physical therapy approach in patients treated for mechanical neck pain: a secondary analysis.

STUDY DESIGN: Secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial (RCT). OBJECTIVES: To perform a secondary analysis on the treatment arm of a larger RCT to determine differences in treatment outcomes, adverse reactions, and effect sizes between patients who received cervical thrust manipulation and those who received only nonthrust manipulation as part of an impairment-based, multimodal treatment program of manual physical therapy (MPT) and exercise for patients with mechanical neck pain. BACKGROUND: A treatment regimen of MPT and exercise has been effective in patients with mechanical neck pain. Limited research has compared the effectiveness of cervical thrust manipulations and nonthrust mobilizations for this patient population, and no studies have investigated the added benefit of cervical thrust manipulations as part of an overall MPT treatment plan. METHODS: Treatment outcomes from 47 patients in the treatment arm of a larger RCT, with a primary complaint of mechanical neck pain, were analyzed. Twenty-three patients (49%) received cervical thrust manipulations as part of their MPT treatment, and 24 patients (51%) received only cervical nonthrust mobilizations. All patients received up to 6 clinic sessions, twice weekly for 3 weeks, and a home exercise program. Primary outcome measures were the Neck Disability Index (NDI), 2 visual analog scales for cervical and upper extremity pain, and a 15-point global rating of change scale. Blinded outcome measurements were collected at baseline and at 3-, 6- and 52-week follow-ups. RESULTS: Consistent with the larger RCT, both subgroups in this secondary analysis demonstrated improvement in short- and long-term pain and disability scores. Low statistical power (beta< or =.28) and the resultant small effect size indices (-0.21 to 0.17) preclude the identification of any between-group differences. No serious adverse reactions were reported by patients in either subgroup. CONCLUSIONS: Clinically meaningful and statistically significant improvements in both subgroups of patients over time suggest that cervical thrust manipulation, as part of the MPT treatment plan, did not influence the results of the treatment arm of the larger RCT from which this study was drawn. Although no between-group differences can be identified, the small observed effect sizes in this study may benefit future studies with sample size estimation for larger RCTs and indicate the need to incorporate clinical prediction rule criteria as a means to improve statistical power. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapy, level 4.

Comparison of short-term response to two spinal manipulation techniques for patients with low back pain in a military beneficiary population.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether military health care beneficiaries with low back pain (LBP) who are likely to respond successfully to spinal manipulation experience a difference in short-term clinical outcomes based on the manipulation technique that is used. METHODS: Sixty patients with LBP identified as likely responders to manipulation underwent a standardized clinical examination and were randomized to receive a lumbopelvic (LP) or lumbar neutral gap (NG) manipulation technique. Outcome measures were a numeric pain rating scale and the modified Oswestry Disability Questionnaire. RESULTS: Both the LP and NG groups experienced statistically significant reductions in pain and disability at 48 hours postmanipulation. The improvements seen in each group were small because of the short follow-up. There were no statistically significant or clinically meaningful differences in pain or disability between the two groups. CONCLUSION: The two manipulation techniques used in this study were equally effective at reducing pain and disability when compared at 48 hours posttreatment. Clinicians may employ either technique for the treatment of LBP and can expect similar outcomes in those who satisfy the clinical prediction rule (CPR). Further research is required to determine whether differences exist at longer-term follow-up periods, after multiple treatment sessions, or in different clinical populations.

The short-term effects of thoracic spine thrust manipulation on patients with shoulder impingement syndrome.

The study was an exploratory, one group pretest/post-test study, with the objective of investigating the short-term effects of thoracic spine thrust manipulations (TSTMs) on patients with shoulder impingement syndrome (SIS). There is evidence that manual physical therapy that includes TSTM and non-thrust manipulation and exercise is effective for the treatment of patients with SIS. However, the relative contributions of specific manual therapy interventions are not known. To date, no published studies address the short-term effects of TSTM in the treatment of SIS. Fifty-six patients (40 males, 16 females; mean age 31.2+/-8.9) with SIS underwent a standardized shoulder examination, immediately followed by TSTM techniques. Outcomes measured were the Numeric Pain and Rating Scale (NPRS) and the Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI), all collected at baseline and at a 48-h follow-up period. Additionally, the Global Rating of Change Scale (GRCS) was collected at 48-h follow-up to measure patient perceived change. At 48-h follow-up, the NPRS change scores for Neer impingement sign, Hawkins impingement sign, resisted empty can, resisted external rotation, resisted internal rotation, and active abduction were all statistically significant (p<0.01). The reduction in the SPADI score was also statistically significant (p<0.001) and the mean GRCS score=1.4+/-2.5. In conclusion, TSTM provided a statistically significant decrease in self reported pain measures and disability in patients with SIS at 48-h follow-up.

Thoracic costotransverse joint pain patterns: a study in normal volunteers.

BACKGROUND: Pain referral patterns of asymptomatic costotransverse joints have not been established. The objective of this study was to determine the pain referral patterns of asymptomatic costotransverse joints via provocative intra-articular injection. METHODS: Eight asymptomatic male volunteers received a combined total of 21 intra-articular costotransverse joint injections. Fluoroscopic imaging was used to identify and isolate each costotransverse joint and guide placement of a 25 gauge, 2.5 inch spinal needle into the costotransverse joint. Following contrast medium injection, the quality, intensity, and distribution of the resultant pain produced were recorded. RESULTS: Of the 21 costotransverse joint injections, 16 (76%) were classified as being intra-articular via arthrograms taken at the time of injection, and 14 of these injections produced a pain sensation distinctly different from that of needle placement. Average pain produced was 3.3/10 on a 0-10 verbal pain scale. Pain was described generally as a deep, dull ache, and pressure sensation. Pain patterns were located superficial to the injected joint, with only the right T2 injections showing referred pain 2 segments cranially and caudally. No chest wall, upper extremity or pseudovisceral pains were reported. CONCLUSION: This study provides preliminary data of the pain referral patterns of costotransverse joints. Further research is needed to compare these findings with those elicited from symptomatic subjects.

The effectiveness of manual physical therapy and exercise for mechanical neck pain: a randomized clinical trial.

STUDY DESIGN: Randomized clinical trial. OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness of manual physical therapy and exercise (MTE) for mechanical neck pain with or without unilateral upper extremity (UE) symptoms, as compared to a minimal intervention (MIN) approach. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Mounting evidence supports the use of manual therapy and exercise for mechanical neck pain, but no studies have directly assessed its effectiveness for UE symptoms. METHODS: A total of 94 patients referred to 3 physical therapy clinics with a primary complaint of mechanical neck pain, with or without unilateral UE symptoms, were randomized to receive MTE or a MIN approach of advice, motion exercise, and subtherapeutic ultrasound. Primary outcomes were the neck disability index, cervical and UE pain visual analog scales (VAS), and patient-perceived global rating of change assessed at 3-, 6-, and 52-weeks. Secondary measures included treatment success rates and post-treatment healthcare utilization. RESULTS: The MTE group demonstrated significantly larger reductions in short- and long-term neck disability index scores (mean 1-year difference -5.1, 95% confidence intervals (CI) -8.1 to -2.1; P = 0.001) and short-term cervical VAS scores (mean 6-week difference -14.2, 95% CI -22.7 to -5.6; P = 0.001) as compared to the MIN group. The MTE group also demonstrated significant within group reductions in short- and long-term UE VAS scores at all time periods (mean 1-year difference -16.3, 95% CI -23.1 to -9.5; P = 0.000). At 1-year, patient perceived treatment success was reported by 62% (29 of 47) of the MTE group and 32% (15 of 47) of the MIN group (P = 0.004). CONCLUSION: An impairment-based MTE program resulted in clinically and statistically significant short- and long-term improvements in pain, disability, and patient-perceived recovery in patients with mechanical neck pain when compared to a program comprising advice, a mobility exercise, and subtherapeutic ultrasound.

Neck pain: Clinical practice guidelines linked to the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health from the Orthopedic Section of the American Physical Therapy Association.

The Orthopaedic Section of the American Physical Therapy Association presents this second set of clinical practice guidelines on neck pain, linked to the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF). The purpose of these practice guidelines is to describe evidence-based orthopaedic physical therapy clinical practice and provide recommendations for (1) examination and diagnostic classification based on body functions and body structures, activity limitations, and participation restrictions, (2) prognosis, (3) interventions provided by physical therapists, and (4) assessment of outcome for common musculoskeletal disorders.

Lumbopelvic manipulation for the treatment of patients with patellofemoral pain syndrome: development of a clinical prediction rule.

STUDY DESIGN: Prospective cohort/predictive validity study. OBJECTIVE: To determine the predictive validity of selected clinical exam items and to develop a clinical prediction rule (CPR) to determine which patients with patellofemoral pain syndrome (PFPS) have a positive immediate response to lumbopelvic manipulation. BACKGROUND: Quadriceps muscle function in patients with PFPS was recently shown to improve following treatment with lumbopelvic manipulation. No previous study has determined if individuals with PFPS experience symptomatic relief of activity-related pain immediately following this manipulation technique. METHODS AND MEASURES: Fifty subjects (26 male, 24 female; age range, 18-45 years) with PFPS underwent a standardized history and physical examination. After the evaluation, each subject performed 3 typically pain-producing functional activities (squatting, stepping up a 20-cm step, and stepping down a 20-cm step). The pain level perceived during each activity was rated on a numerical pain scale (0 representing no pain and 10 the worst possible pain). Following the assessment, all subjects were treated with a lumbopelvic manipulation, which was immediately followed by retesting the 3 functional activities to determine if there was any change in pain ratings. An immediate overall 50% or greater reduction in pain, or moderate or greater improvement on a global rating of change questionnaire, was considered a treatment success. Likelihood ratios (LRs) were calculated to determine which examination items were most predictive of treatment outcome. RESULTS: Data for 49 subjects were included in the data analysis, of which 22 (45%) had a successful outcome. Five predictor variables were identified. The most powerful predictor of treatment success was a side-to-side difference in hip internal rotation range of motion greater than 14 masculine (+LR, 4.9). If this variable was present, the chance of experiencing a successful outcome improved from 45% to 80%. CONCLUSION: A CPR was developed to predict an immediate successful response to lumbopelvic manipulation in patients with PFPS. However, in light of a limited sample size and omission of potentially meaningful predictor variables, future studies are necessary to validate the CPR.

Development of a clinical prediction rule to identify patients with knee pain and clinical evidence of knee osteoarthritis who demonstrate a favorable short-term response to hip mobilization.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The primary purpose of this study was to develop a clinical prediction rule (CPR) for identifying patients with knee pain and clinical evidence of knee osteoarthritis (OA) with favorable short-term response to hip mobilizations. The secondary purpose was to determine the predictive validity of individual clinical tests for identifying these same patients. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Sixty subjects with knee OA, aged 51 to 79 years, completed self-report questionnaires, a clinical examination of the hip and knee, and functional tests and were treated with 4 hip mobilizations. Follow-up testing was completed 2 days later. The reference criterion for determining a favorable response was either (1) a decrease of at least 30% on composite Numerical Pain Rating Scale score obtained during functional tests or (2) a Global Rating of Change Scale score of at least 3. RESULTS: The CPR developed in this study comprised 5 variables: (1) hip or groin pain or paresthesia, (2) anterior thigh pain, (3) passive knee flexion less than 122 degrees, (4) passive hip medial (internal) rotation less than 17 degrees, and (5) pain with hip distraction. Based on the pretest probability of success (68%), the presence of one variable had a positive likelihood ratio of 5.1 and increased the probability of a successful response to 92% at 48-hour follow-up. If 2 variables were present, the positive likelihood ratio was 12.9 and the probability of success increased to 97%. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: The results suggest that the CPR developed in this study could improve clinicians' decision making and efficiency in examining and treating patients with knee OA.

Development of a clinical prediction rule for classifying patients with patellofemoral pain syndrome who respond to patellar taping.

STUDY DESIGN: Predictive validity/diagnostic test study. OBJECTIVE: To determine the predictive validity and interrater reliability of selected clinical exam items and to develop a clinical prediction rule (CPR) to determine which patients respond successfully to patellar taping. BACKGROUND: Patellar taping is often used to treat patients with PFPS. However, the characteristics of the patients who respond best to patellar taping intervention have not been identified. METHODS AND MEASURES: Fifty volunteers (27 males, 23 females) with PFPS underwent a standardized clinical examination. Diagnosis of PFPS was based on the complaint of retropatellar pain that was provoked by a partial squat or stair ascent/descent. Subjects performed 3 functional activities and rated their pain during each activity on a numerical rating scale (NPRS). All subjects received treatment with a medial glide patellar-taping technique and repeated the functional activities and pain ratings. An immediate 50% reduction in pain or moderate improvement on a global rating of change (GRC) questionnaire was considered a treatment success. Likelihood ratios (LRs) were calculated to determine which examination items were most predictive of treatment outcome. Logistic regression analysis identified items included in the CPR. RESULTS: Twenty-six subjects (52%) had an immediate successful response to the intervention. Two examination items (positive patellar tilt test or tibial varum greater than 5 degrees, +LR = 4.4) comprised the CPR. Application of the CPR improved the probability of a successful outcome from 52% to 83%. Fifty-eight percent of the lower extremity measures were associated with moderate to good reliability (reliability coefficient range, 0.52-0.84). The reliability coefficients for the items that comprised the CPR were 0.49 (patellar tilt) and 0.66 (tibial varum). CONCLUSION: A CPR was developed to predict an immediate successful response to a medial glide patellar taping technique. Validation of the CPR in an independent sample is necessary before widespread clinical use can be recommended.

A comparison between two physical therapy treatment programs for patients with lumbar spinal stenosis: a randomized clinical trial.

STUDY DESIGN: Multicenter randomized, controlled trial. OBJECTIVE: To compare two physical therapy programs for patients with lumbar spinal stenosis. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Scant evidence exists regarding effectiveness of nonsurgical management programs for lumbar spinal stenosis. METHODS: Fifty-eight patients with lumbar spinal stenosis were randomized to one of two 6-week physical therapy programs. One program included manual physical therapy, body weight supported treadmill walking, and exercise (Manual Physical Therapy, Exercise, and Walking Group), while the other included lumbar flexion exercises, a treadmill walking program, and subtherapeutic ultrasound (Flexion Exercise and Walking Group). Perceived recovery was assessed with a global rating of change scale. Secondary outcomes included: Oswestry, a numerical pain rating scale, a measure of satisfaction, and a treadmill test. Testing occurred at baseline, 6 weeks, and 1 year. Perceived recovery, pain, and other healthcare resources used were collected with a long-term follow-up questionnaire. RESULTS: A greater proportion of patients in the manual physical therapy, exercise, and walking group reported recovery at 6 weeks compared with the flexion exercise and walking group (P = 0.0015), with a number needed to treat for perceived recovery of 2.6 (confidence interval, 1.8-7.8). At 1 year, 62% and 41% of the manual therapy, exercise, and walking group and the flexion exercise and walking group, respectively, still met the threshold for recovery. Improvements in disability, satisfaction, and treadmill walking tests favored the manual physical therapy, exercise, and walking group at all follow-up points. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with lumbar spinal stenosis can benefit from physical therapy. Additional gains may be realized with the inclusion of manual physical therapy interventions, exercise, and a progressive body-weight supported treadmill walking program.