Which Back-Pain technique works best? new study puts mulligan and maitland to the test
NCT ID NCT06941220
First seen Jun 25, 2026 · Last updated Jun 27, 2026 · Updated 2 times
Summary
This study compared two common hands-on treatments—Mulligan and Maitland mobilization—in 90 people with chronic low back pain lasting more than three months. Researchers measured changes in pain, disability, and the ability to sense the position of the lower back (proprioception). The goal was to see if one technique offers better results for improving function and body awareness.
What this could mean
Our plain-language read of the trial. This is informational only, not medical advice or a prediction.
- Active substance
- Manual therapy (Mulligan SNAG technique vs Maitland mobilization)
- What this could lead to
- If one technique proves clearly better, it could give therapists a more effective option for reducing pain and improving movement awareness in people with chronic low back pain.
- What could go wrong
- This is a small, completed trial with no blinding, so results may be influenced by patient or therapist expectations. The difference between the two techniques may be small or not clinically meaningful.
This is an AI summary of the original study and may miss details. Read our disclaimer.
Study facts
What this study's own registry entry says, in plain language.
- Phase
-
Not a phased trial
Phase numbers describe drug development. The registry uses this when they do not apply, as it does for trials of devices, procedures or behaviour changes, and for observational studies.
- Participants
-
90 people
The number who actually took part.
- Started
-
Apr 2025
- Finished
-
Jan 2026
- Lead sponsor
-
Other sponsor
The registry's catch-all category, for sponsors it does not file as a company, a government agency, or a research network.
Who can take part
This study's own entry requirements. Only the study team can say for certain whether you qualify.
- Ages
-
18 to 60 years
- Sex
-
Anyone
- Healthy volunteers
-
Not accepted
This study is not open to healthy volunteers. The entry requirements below say who it is open to.
Show the full entry requirements Hide the full entry requirements
Copied word for word from the study's registry entry, so the wording is the study team's rather than ours.
Inclusion Criteria: * They had interrupted or continuous LBP symptoms for more than 3 months * both gender Exclusion Criteria: * specific LBP * those who were pregnant * those with neurological problems
Get updates
Get notified about this study
Sign up to get updates when this study changes or when new studies for Low back pain are added.
Genom att skicka in godkänner du våra Användarvillkor
Conditions
The condition(s) this trial relates to.
As listed by the trial registrant
The condition terms exactly as the trial's registrant entered them.
Contacts and locations
Locations
-
Alshaymaa Shaaban Abdelazeim
Giza, Doki, 11251, Egypt
More trials for these conditions
Other studies related to the condition(s) this trial covers.
- Pilates takes on standard physical therapy in battle against Work-Related back pain
- Radiofrequency device tested as Add-On for stubborn back pain
- Back muscles hold clues for treating recurrent low back pain
- Skip the GP? physiotherapy first for back pain put to the test
- Can yoga ease back pain when recovery looks unlikely?
- Can a second injection target the source of stubborn back pain?