背景及目的：以桑德式與傳統式腰椎牽引治療腰椎間盤突出症的病患，比較兩組間及同組內治療前後之療效差異。方法：本研究共有53位受試者，隨機分派至桑德組（25位）與傳統組（28位）。在病患治療第１日、第4日、第7日、第14日、第21日及停止治療日一個月後均接受評估，評估內容包含VAS疼痛指數、Oswestry失能指數、直腿抬高測試、肌力測試、動作測試。研究期間病患流失率高，因此以分析至少完成四次評估之病患（桑德組13位，傳統組6位）之療效為主。結果：二組病患各次評估時在各項評估上無顯著差異，但在治療後，兩組病患在疼痛指數及失能指數上皆有進步趨勢。直腿抬高測試、肌力測試、動作測試中，症狀較輕的人數亦有增加趨勢。結論：本研究結果顯示二種牽引模式之療效並無顯著差異。要區分二種牽引之差異，除了增加完成療程之病患人數外，也許應由二模式牽引治療在整個腰椎間盤突出症病患病程中的所扮演的角色加以探討。（物理治療2003;28(6):300-307）

Background and propose: The purpose of this study was to compare treatment effects in pain, disability and impairment between Saunders’ traction and traditional traction for patients with lumbar disc herniation (LDH). Methods: Fifty-three LDH subjects were randomly assigned to a Saunders’ or a traditional traction group. In addition to traction, all patients received education, hot pack and interferential therapy. All subjects were evaluated with visual analog scale (VAS) for pain, Oswestry disability questionnaire, straight leg raising (SLR), muscle testing, and movement pain before treatment and at the 4th day, 7th day, 14th day, 21st day in the treatment period and one month after discharge. Because of high drop out rate among these patients, comparison was made only in those who received at least 4 consecutive evaluations (13 in the Saunders’ group and 6 in the traditional group). Results: There was no significant difference in the VAS score, Oswestry score, or other tests between the two treatment groups. Patients in both groups showed non-significant progress in VAS sore and Oswestry score during the treatment course. Conclusion: There was no difference in the effects with completed date and focused on the role of Saunders’ traction mode in the clinical course of lumbar disc herniation. (FJPT 2003;28(6):300-307)