This study was carried out to compare the clinical outcome of intermittent versus static traction application in 40 patients with acute disk prolapse or its recurrence.

The cases were randomly divided into two groups (equal in number). First group was received hotpack, ultrasound, intermittent traction and exercise. While second group was received hotpack, ultrasound, static traction and exercise. The Assessment included clinical parameters such as pain, lumbar schober, right and left lateral flexion, straight leg raising test and the neurological evaluations such as sensory, reflex and motor deficits and Low back Pain Outcome scale (LBPO) and Roland Disability Questionnoire scale (RDQ). Significant improvements were determined in both groups with respect to clinical evaluation, LBPO scale and RDQ scale (p<0.001). In the neurological evaluation, there were also improvements in deficiency of sensation (p<0.01), loss of reflex (p<0.05) and loss of muscle power (p<0.05) in two groups. In comparison of two groups, at the end of treatments no statistically significant difference was found in terms of clinical tests (p>0.05).

In conclusion, wesuggest that both intermittent and static traction applications provide clinical improvements and that no superiority has been detected between intermittent traction and static in the treatment of acute disk prolapses.