A systematic review of current evidence on clinical outcomes of lumbar roll and modified SIMS manipulation techniques
Farooq Islam1, Umair Ahmed2, Christopher McCarthy3
1University Institute of Physical Therapy, University of Chenab, Gujrat - Pakistan.
Introduction:
The lumbar roll and modified SIMS are two common manipulation techniques used in clinical practice for sacroiliac joint dysfunction (SIJD), a common cause of low back and pelvic pain. However, there hasn't been clear evidence of these methods' relative clinical efficacy in recent literature.
Methods:
This review was registered in PROSPERO (Reg. No. CRD420251253094) and adhered to PRISMA 2020 guidelines. Studies published between January 2021 and December 2025 were found through a search of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, CINAHL, PEDro, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar (first 200 results). Randomized controlled trials, quasi-experimental trials, and controlled clinical studies evaluating lumbar roll or modified SIMS manipulation in adults with SIJD using imaging-assisted criteria or validated provocation tests were all considered eligible. Screening, data extraction, and risk-of-bias assessment (RoB-2 and ROBINS-I) were carried out independently by two reviewers.
Results:
Nine of the 1,264 records that were found satisfied the requirements for inclusion. The number of participants in the sample varied from 30 to 90. Following manipulation, the majority of trials reported significant short-term reductions in pain (VAS/NPRS) and disability (ODI/functional measures), with lumbar roll and modified SIMS demonstrating similar clinical benefit. Improvements in pelvic alignment and mobility have been documented in several studies. There were a few transient adverse events, and no significant complications were noted.
Conclusion:
Although more high-quality trials are required to confirm long-term efficacy and ideal treatment protocols, lumbar roll and modified SIMS manipulation techniques consistently show short-term clinical benefits for SIJD. However, due to the absence of direct head-to-head comparisons and reliance on indirect classification of techniques, these findings should be interpreted as exploratory rather than definitive.
