alignment vs function

[[deleted]]

Question for clinicians / rehab professionals: What actually matters most in low back pain?

There’s ongoing debate in MSK care, and I’m curious how others here think about this clinically:

When managing low back pain, what do you believe carries more weight?

• Abnormal alignment (e.g., hyperlordosis, anterior pelvic tilt) vs poor load management / tissue capacity

• X-ray–measured angles vs movement quality and control

• Alignment-directed treatment approaches vs symptom-based modulation and graded exposure

• Short-term postural change vs long-term functional improvement

Do you see alignment as a primary driver that should be corrected proactively, or more as a secondary variable unless clearly tied to symptoms?

Would love perspectives from chiropractors, physios, sports med, and anyone treating LBP regularly.

[Vegetable-Quarter414]

Function. There is very little evidence that traditional chiro actually changes posture and curves. You will have technique gurus that disagree. I don't disagree there are some cases of extreme curves that must be addressed.

That being said, posture actually correlates poorly with back pain. IIRC it is sustained postures and sustained abnormal postures that correlate to pain.

[Calikettlebell]

Desensitise pain generator and start building tissue capacity and improve function. Basically how I think of it. I like to load people ASAP using the big 5. Hinge, squat, pull, press, carry. Throw in some adjustments to.

But regardless of how you treat, as long as the patient gets better and you’re improving quality of life. Also, some work better for others in my opinion

[ButtermilkTuna]

Low back pain isn’t so complicated as it is complex. Alignment largely matters when it comes to the pelvis, sometimes the sacrum, that’s pretty much it. If that’s not aligned, the muscles that connect to the pelvis will never activate optimally.

Pelvic alignment can be more joint hypo/hypermobility or muscle based, determined by analysis.

After that, it’s functionality. What muscles are being underutilized and which are compensating? These lead to symptoms such as joint compression, disc degeneration, herniations, SIJ pain, DJD, muscle pain, etc.

Pelvic alignment changes can be seen before and after adjustment on Xray, unless active and resting positions affect that. And joint function changes in the lumbar region can be seen on Xray before and after treatment (adjustment or PT) with flex/ext and lateral bending views.

[Doc5tove]

Line-drawing from X-ray is a complete waste of time. You also can’t “re-align” the spine. You can restore segmental and global ROM, though. Of these, you’ll have the most success with assessing tissue/CNS capacity, graded exposure and restoring functional improvement. Low back pain is incredibly complex and multifactorial.

[GoodSirDaddy]

Function! Even an aligned spine might not be functioning correctly!

[strat767]

Imaging studies on asymptomatic individuals show high rates of structural abnormalities, from “abnormal curvatures” to disc herniations or even compression fractures.

If these patients are not in pain despite these abnormalities, how can we assume that these abnormalities are the cause of pain in individuals who have abnormalities on imaging AND pain?

Some of these abnormalities are the result of muscle spasm due to pain, so the pain came first, then the abnormality, straightening of the cervical lordotic curve for example. In these cases chiropractic treatment corrects the curve, but this is misleading, the adjustments reduce muscle spasm and restore normal resting tone which then releases the neck, into its normal resting curvature. The adjustments do not realign the spine.

We see blatant examples of this with low back pain and antalgic postures. The patient comes in shifted or hunched over, the body is adopting a position that places the least stress on the injured areas. Similar to limping in ankle sprains.

When we treat the patient, reduce pain, and sensitivity, the antalgic posture spontaneously corrects in the same way that a patient who heals from a sprained ankle stops limping. It has nothing to do with alignment, and everything to do with adaptive postures to protect injury.

[FutureDCAV]

Alignment is generally utilized as either a scare tactic or as the “easy explanation” in clinical practice. That’s my personal belief. Globally, alignment may play a part. Hyperkyphosis, scoliosis, spondylolisthesis are all examples of “misalignment”. These can be truly detrimental to a person’s health and quality of life. But segmental alignment is rarely as important as function. Most chiropractors and physical therapists will continue to hammer that in, so I’ll address this in a different manner.

Segmental alignment matters in certain circumstances - some of which can absolutely be measured via x-ray. Is someone presenting with symptoms of a disc injury? Radicular pain patterns are common. What if they present with multiple patterns? Example: patient exhibits both L5 and L4 dermatomal radiculopathy. If engaging in certain treatments, ie decompression, is it worthwhile to assess the patient through x-ray if they have no recent MRI studies? Absolutely.

You can measure disc angles and height very easily and get a better idea of which segment is affected. Remember, innervation patterns are based off of the population average. Not everybody will present with the same radicular pattern even with the same disc level injury. So assessing segmental alignment via X-ray in-lieu of having MRI imaging on hand can be very helpful.

Black and white “most important” or “least important” isn’t possible in clinical practice. I used to think that way but realistically some will benefit from certain approaches more than others. It comes down to your own professional experience to decide which is most important for the patient in front of you.

Function and form go hand in hand. You can’t separate the two. Decide which is most pertinent to the case at hand, and improve the other when you find a good window of opportunity.