Spinal decompression is a relatively new form of spinal traction being promoted for the treatment of protruding and degenerated spinal discs in the lower back and neck. There has been considerable controversy surrounding spinal decompression since it first started gaining popularity in the United States. Part of the controversy had to do with marketing claims made by equipment manufacturers eager to capture market share that were overzealous and sometimes outright fraudulent, and part was due to confusion and ignorance about the differences between spinal decompression and regular spinal traction.

If you can get past the controversy and consider the merits of spinal decompression objectively, it is clear that it is a reasonably good treatment option for disc-related pain and disability. It is not the miraculous cure-all that is has been touted as by its promoters, but it is not the over-hyped scam that its critics have claimed either. As with many things, the truth about spinal decompression is somewhere in between the two extreme points of view.

Some experts who have failed to look beyond their preconceived ideas have concluded that spinal decompression is no different from the regular spinal traction that has been used for many years in spine pain treatment with minimal benefits. But if one takes a closer look at the evidence, it is clear that there are distinct differences between regular traction and spinal decompression in both the physiological effects and the long-term treatment outcomes.

Regular traction systems simply pull on the spine at a pre-set rate and force. Spinal decompression systems gradually build up the force of the pull, and the more sophisticated spinal decompression systems can also adapt to the body’s reactions to the treatment. For example, the DRX-9000 system monitors the body’s resistance to the pull and if the body’s muscles begin to contract and fight the treatment, the machine immediately (within 1/17th of a second) “gives” to the resistance by decreasing its pull. This adaptability of the machine allows the body to stay relaxed for the majority of the treatment and by keeping the body relaxed, the treatment effects are much greater on the spinal discs that what can be achieved with regular traction, or even the less-sophisticated spinal decompression systems.

Studies done on changes in disc pressure from regular traction found that although traction did reduce disc pressure, it was insufficient to reduce disc bulging or to significantly improve disc hydration and nutrition. This is because muscular resistance to traction forces simply limits the effects of the traction pull. The least sophisticated of the spinal decompression systems improve on these results and do reduce disc bulging in some cases because the traction pull builds up very gradually and helps prevent muscular resistance resulting in dramatic reduction in disc pressure to a mild suction force sufficient to retract disc bulges. With the higher-end spinal decompression systems, treatment effects are greater still because they can largely eliminate muscular reaction and resistance. These systems have been shown to actually produce strong suction forces within the spinal discs which effectively pull protruding disc material back into the disc as well as pull in fluid and nutrients which are believed to promote disc healing.

That being said, even the best spinal decompression systems do not work for every patient. There are of course situations that prevent the use of spinal decompression, but even with well-qualified patients, there are some people it just does not help. Although clinical studies claim a 90% success rate, the real world results are not as good. Formal clinical studies have the advantage of being able to exclude less-than-perfect test subjects and those who fail to follow the treatment protocol exactly to the letter. In the real world, there are complicating factors that can interfere with treatment results, people miss appointments, people engage in physical activities that they aren’t ready for, etc..

With careful patient selection, the real success rate for spinal decompression is probably around 70- 75% as a stand-alone treatment, and perhaps somewhat higher when combined with other therapies. This success rate seems to hold up in the long run for most patients as well, with very few reported recurrences of symptoms a year after treatment. But even at a 70% success rate, spinal decompression is more effective than the most common disc-related treatments currently in use, such as spinal injections and surgery, which most studies have found provide long-term benefits in only about 50% of patients.

The effectiveness of spinal decompression treatment for a specific patient will depend greatly on the nature of his or her condition. In general, spinal decompression works very well in cases of mild to moderate disc protrusion and/or degeneration. Disc extrusions (actual ruptures) and severe protrusions will sometimes get favorable results with spinal decompression, but the results are far less reliable than with less severe cases. Spinal decompression works well for patients of all ages. In fact, although some patients fear they are too old to get good results, my experience has been that older individuals actually do somewhat better than their younger counterparts, perhaps because the older patients are less likely to engage in heavy exertion that might cause a re-injury of the discs.

Is spinal decompression a legitimate form of treatment for bulging and degenerated discs? Yes. Will it be of benefit to you? Most likely it will be, assuming you are a suitable candidate for this form of treatment. I think it is important to temper your expectations though, because it is definitely not a sure-fire “cure” for your problem. I do recommend that people with disc-related pain at least try spinal decompression before considering a spinal surgery, and most who do will be able to avoid the surgeon’s knife. Even better, those people who do respond favorably to spinal decompression treatment can usually resume almost any activity they wish, while surgery patients are often limited in what they can do for the remainder of their lives.

Although is is far from a perfect solution to disc-related pain, spinal decompression is a good treatment option for most people with protruding and/or degenerated spinal discs.

The short answer to the question posed as the title of today’s post is “YES!”.  Of course spinal decompression experts are biased against surgery.  We feel very strongly that, except in certain rare situations, disc surgery is unnecessary and can potentially do more harm than good in the long run.

But just because we’re biased doesn’t mean we aren’t right.

Here’s some opinions from more neutral sources that share our lack of enthusiasm for disc surgery:

November 2006 Article From USA Today

Wikipedia – Failed Back Syndrome

We invite you to draw your own conclusions.

For people with severe disc-related back pain and sciatica, long-term relief can be hard to come by and the treatment options often come down to spinal decompression or back surgery. Each treatment option has its pros and cons, but in the end, the best option will depend on a variety of factors that are unique to each case.

Unfortunately, there are several misconceptions concerning both spinal decompression and back surgery that can make it very difficult for one to choose a treatment approach, particularly when one’s judgement may be clouded by pain and/or pain medication. The purpose of this article is to attempt to cut through some of the myths and misconceptions concerning these forms of disc treatment to assist disc pain sufferers in making an informed decision as to the form of treatment to pursue.

Spinal decompression is an advanced form of traction, but it has very different effects on the spinal discs than regular traction. Due to computer-controlled motors, true spinal decompression systems can “trick” the muscles along the spine into staying relaxed during treatment, allowing for the creation of a suction force within the disc that pulls bulging disc material back inward and also enhances disc hydration and nutrition that will subsequently promote disc healing. Because regular traction systems must fight the muscles, there is far less of an effect on the disc, and regular traction is usually insufficient to produce any long-term relief of disc-related pain.

While spinal decompression is highly successful in treating most cases of disc-related pain, it is not 100% effective and there are situations in which it is contraindicated. In my San Antonio Spinal Decompression practice, it has been my experience that it is usually not very effective when a patient has a severe disc extrusion, or a full rupture of the disc, rather than just bulging. Spinal decompression is not safe to use when the patient has spinal instability in the are of the damaged disc. In cases where spinal decompression is unlikely to be effective and/or is contraindicated, surgery becomes the only real option for achieving good lasting results.

Although it may be the best option in a small number of disc-pain cases, back surgery is far from being an ideal solution. Patients sometimes have the impression that a back surgery will completely solve their back pain once and for all, but this is rarely the case. Statistics have shown that a prior back surgery is one of the most telling predictors of whether a person will need back surgery in the future. Even though an aggressive back surgery to remove a damaged disc will ensure that the removed disc will never cause a problem again, such a surgery will typically create future problems that can be as bad or worse than the initial disc problem.

Post-surgical scar tissue and increased wear and tear on adjacent discs can conspire to create new areas of spinal cord and/or spinal nerve compression months or years after spinal surgery. For this reason, it is my opinion that spinal surgery should be reserved as a last resort when all other treatments (including spinal decompression) have failed or have otherwise been ruled out.

The  following video explains the DRX9000 and discusses personal experiences with this form of treatment.  All testimonials reflect individual results.  Treatment results are dependent on several factors and your results may vary.

We’ve been treating back pain in our San Antonio spine clinic for several years now, and one thing is for certain:  chronic back pain is incredibly common and due to the failure of the typical treatments, a large number of people are living in pain needlessly.

The most commonly utilized treatments for chronic back pain have a poor success rate statisitically, but spinal decompression with the DRX9000 is providing relief for even back pain sufferers who have suffered for many years.

Unfortunately, spinal decompression remains underutilized as a back pain treatment for a couple of reasons.  First, the early marketing for spinal decompression was often hype-filled and factually inaccurate.  Although decompression is statistically the most effective treatment currently available for most serious types of back pain, the early marketing for it promoted it as a panacea for all back pain sufferers.  Spinal decompression does enjoy an excellent success rate, but it is not effective in every patient and it is simply not appropriate for every back pain sufferer.

Another reason that spinal decompression continues to  be underutilized for treating back pain is due to the usual challenges that all new health care procedures face in the United States.

Basically, insurance companies usually refuse coverage for health care procedures that do not have an established procedure code.  In the U.S., the American Medical Association is responsible for producing the procedure codes, but they don’t make new codes until there are reasonably high numbers of doctors utilizing a given new procedure. Doctors are usually reluctant to invest the money in the equipment and/or training necessary to provide one of these new treatments unless they know they will be reimbursed for the treatment by health insurance companies.  This brings us full-circle to the insurance companies not covering procedures that don’t have an established procedure code. Because of this system, most new medical treatments are not widely used for several years until consumer demand gradually pushes more doctors to start providing the treatment. 

Due to the lack of insurance coverage for spinal decompression, many of the back pain patients we consult with at our san antonio spinal decompression clinic will opt to go with insurance-covered treatment methods. Unfortunately many of these continue to live in pain for years and spend thousands of dollars in insurance co-pays and deductibles on the standard back pain treatments without any lasting relief.

Many of these back pain sufferers finally opt for surgery looking for a cure for their symptoms.   Statistically, about half of the patients who do seek a surgical treatment for their back pain discover that the surgery either does not help or makes things worse.

While spinal decompression is far from 100% successful, it does get good to excellent results for the vast majority of back pain patients.  Ironically, although some patients we’ve consulted with have opted to go the surgery route because they think it will be less expensive due to it being covered by insurance, most back surgeries wind up being more expensive to the patient than spinal decompression.

Many back pain patients don’t realize in advance that the co-payments for a high-priced medical procedure like back surgery will usually run several thousand dollars.  With no insurance coverage at all, spinal decompression typically costs the patient less out of pocket than an average back surgery (if they are paying an insurance co-payment of 10% or more), and a lot less than a complicated back surgery.

For the majority of people suffering from serious back pain, spinal decompression is statistically the most effective treatment available and in the long-run is usually the most cost-effective treatment available.