Manual therapy as a management approach for gastroesophageal reflux disease: A systematic review

Introduction: Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a chronic condition resulting from a retrograde flow of part of the gastroduodenal contents into the esophagus. Generally, this reflux is linked to a malfunction of the lower esophageal sphincter. Studies involving manipulative therapies suggested an important role in the coadjuvant treatment for reflux, acting as a form of prevention and treatment. Objective: to carry out a systematic review of the literature regarding the treatment by means of manual techniques for GERD, aiming to evaluate the methodological quality employed in the studies, summarize the findings, analyze the effectiveness of the intervention and possible recommendation for clinical practice and/or indicate the need for further research. Methodology: The study is characterized as a systematic review, with research conducted in the English and Portuguese languages, in the databases Bireme, Lilacs, PubMed, PEDro, Scielo, Cochrane and Google Scholar. We exctracted the manual therapy techniques used in the selected studies, and the reporting of the effectiveness of these interventions. The PRISMA reporting guidance was used to structure the review and the PEDro scale was used to evaluate the methodological quality of the included studies. Results: A total of 6 clinical trials were found and included a total of 218 people analyzed by objective and subjective measures in the pre- and post-intervention phases. Regarding methodological quality, 3 studies had scores higher than 7, i.e. high quality, while one had a score of 4, and 2 had a score of 3, denoting low internal validity. The observed results show positive clinical effects for visceral manual therapy in the gastroesophageal reflux in adults. Conclusion: The research suggests the presence of favorable results with the use of manual techniques for the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux, seen in studies with high methodological quality, however, due to the small number, and other studies with a low score assigned by the PEDro scale, caution should be adopted and there is the need for further experimental studies.