Do Inversion Tables Work? Benefits the Evidence Supports

Most lists of inversion table benefits read the same way: back pain relief, better circulation, lower stress, sharper thinking, better posture, and very few of them name a study. We are not doctors, and we have not tested these tables on people, so every claim below is sorted by the published research actually behind it. Some of that research is encouraging: small studies have measured a longer spine, wider disc spaces and, in back pain patients, better flexibility. Some of it is not. We show both.

Do Inversion Tables Work? The Pros and Cons Side by Side

A Cochrane review published in 2013 pooled 32 trials of traction in general and found little or no effect on low-back pain (Wegner, 2013). A 2012 pilot trial of 24 people waiting for disc surgery, 13 of whom added inversion, found more of the inversion group avoided the operation, with no clear gain in pain scores (Prasad, 2012). In a 2000 trial of 29 people, inversion performed about the same as conventional mechanical traction, so the table is a form of traction, not a different treatment (Güvenol, 2000).

Do Inversion Tables Work for Lower Back Pain?

The honest answer is “for some people, briefly, in small studies.” The big analysis points the other way. The Cochrane team found that traction, alone or added to other treatments, had little or no impact on pain, function, overall improvement or return to work (Wegner, 2013). Most of those trials tested manual or mechanical traction, not inversion, so the result does not prove tables fail.

The inversion-specific work is smaller. The Newcastle pilot and registry are covered below, and a 2013 trial of 47 women with chronic low back pain found less pain in all three groups, including the group that only lay flat (Kim, 2013). That means the improvement cannot be credited to hanging alone. Our page on the best inversion tables for back pain looks at the models used in this setting, and our overview of inversion therapy places the table among the other ways of inverting.

What Do Doctors and Chiropractors Say?

We could not verify a position statement on inversion tables from any physician or chiropractic association, so we cannot tell you there is an official view either way. What we found are guidelines on back pain and studies by individual clinicians.

The UK’s NICE guideline on low back pain and sciatica, published in 2016 and last updated in July 2026, tells clinicians: “Do not offer traction for managing low back pain with or without sciatica.” The guideline does not single out inversion tables; the whole category of traction is what it declines to recommend (NICE, 2016).
The American College of Physicians’ 2017 guideline on noninvasive treatment of low back pain lists heat, massage, acupuncture, spinal manipulation, exercise and several other options. Traction does not appear in its abstract. We read the abstract only, so this does not mean the full guideline is silent on it (Qaseem, 2017).
A neurosurgical team in Newcastle, England, ran the pilot trial and registry described below. They are the main clinical voice in favor, for a narrow group (Prasad, 2012) (Mendelow, 2021).
The 1985 Inverchair study that measured flexibility and disc spaces came from the Canadian Memorial Chiropractic College, but it was a single study of a seated device, funded by that device’s maker. It is not a statement from the profession (Vernon et al., 1985).

What the Evidence Supports

Claim	What is behind it	How strong
Spinal traction (decompression)	X-ray studies in healthy adults and back pain patients show disc spaces widening during inversion (Kane, 1985) (Gianakopoulos, 1985)	Measured, short-term
Less pain, more flexibility in chronic low back pain	One randomized trial of 47 women (Kim, 2013)	Preliminary
Muscle relaxation	Two small studies yes, one larger study no	Mixed
Fewer disc operations	One pilot trial of 24, one registry of 85	Preliminary, narrow group
General back pain relief	Cochrane: traction in general, little or no effect	Weak

What It Does Not Support

Claim	What we could verify
Lower cortisol or stress hormones	No peer-reviewed study found
Less anxiety	No study we could verify
Better circulation, more oxygen to the brain	No study of a benefit; the one table study urges caution
Lymphatic drainage, “detox”	No study found
Fewer headaches or migraines	No study we could verify
Better posture, more height	Spine lengthens during inversion; no study shows it lasts

Who Might Reasonably Try It

On the evidence, the people with the most reason to discuss inversion with a doctor are those with a single-level lumbar disc problem, under care, who want to try something conservative first. That is the group in the Newcastle work (Prasad, 2012) (Mendelow, 2021). For anyone else, the benefit is unproven, and the choice is between you, your doctor and a modest expectation.

How Inversion Tables Are Supposed to Work

Every claimed benefit starts from one mechanism, so it helps to be exact about it.

Gravity as Traction

A 2023 paper on inversion table therapy in the journal Disability and Rehabilitation describes it as “a form of spinal traction which is thought to have a role in relieving low back pain due to the gravity-facilitated traction of the spine which distracts the lumbar vertebrae” (Kassay, 2023). In plain terms: when you hang by your ankles, your own upper body weight pulls downward on your spine, and the vertebrae in your lower back are pulled slightly apart. That separation is what the word “decompression” refers to on product pages. The same head-down idea is sold in other forms too, and our pages on inversion chairs and the yoga trapeze look at how those compare with a table, and our guide on how to decompress your spine ranks the ways to do it without one.

Why “Thought to” Matters

Notice the wording: “is thought to.” The authors are describing a proposed mechanism, not a proven effect, and their paper is a regulatory and opinion piece, not a trial (Kassay, 2023). So the theory is reasonable, but it does not tell you whether the separation lasts once you are upright again, how much pain relief it produces, or for whom.

What the Mechanism Does Not Cover

Traction is a mechanical idea about the spine. It says nothing about hormones, mood, immune function or blood flow to the brain. When a site lists those as inversion table benefits, it has left the mechanism behind. Each of those claims needs its own evidence, and as the next sections show, we could not find any.

Inversion Therapy and Cortisol: What We Could Find

If you searched for inversion therapy and cortisol, or for stress reduction and cortisol levels, here is the direct answer: we found no peer-reviewed study on inversion tables and cortisol. The claim that inversion lowers cortisol comes from wellness marketing, not from a measurement.

Where the Cortisol Claim Comes From

The idea circulates on fitness equipment blogs and in posts that quote wellness and self-help books. The usual version says that hanging upside down “activates the parasympathetic nervous system” and brings cortisol down.

None of the pages making that claim that we looked at cite a study that measured cortisol in people using an inversion table. When we searched the medical literature, the cortisol studies that surfaced were about cortisol in general, not about inversion. That is a gap, and nobody should fill it with a number.

What Inversion Measurably Does to Your Body

What has been measured points in a different direction from relaxation. In a randomized trial published in 1986, 60 healthy women aged 20 to 30 were inverted for two minutes, and “both systolic and diastolic blood pressures increased significantly” compared with standing controls (Haskvitz, 1986). The abstract does not say by how many mmHg.

In a 1984 clinical study, eye pressure after five minutes of full inversion rose from 16.8 to 32.9 mmHg in normal eyes and from 21.3 to 37.6 mmHg in eyes with glaucoma, roughly double (Weinreb, 1984). And in a 2019 ultrasound study on an actual inversion table, blood flow in the carotid and middle cerebral arteries changed significantly, as did a marker of intracranial pressure, within three minutes of inverting (Kondrashova, 2019).

None of these studies measured stress hormones. They do show that inversion is not a neutral resting position: pressure goes up in the blood vessels, the eyes and the skull.

Can Inversion Still Feel Relaxing?

It can, for some people, and that is a real experience. Lying still, breathing slowly and stretching may feel calming on any piece of equipment.

But “it felt relaxing” and “it lowered my cortisol” are different claims. The first is yours to judge. The second would need a blood or saliva test in a study, and that study has not been published as far as we can find.

What About Anxiety?

The same applies to anxiety. We found no study testing inversion tables as a treatment for anxiety. If anxiety is your reason for looking at one, a doctor or therapist has treatments with actual trials behind them. An inversion table is not one of them, at least not yet.

Inversion Table Benefits for Back Pain: What the Research Says

This is where the evidence is, and it pulls in two directions. Both sides deserve their numbers.

The Cochrane Analysis: Little or No Effect

A Cochrane review published in 2013 pooled 32 randomized trials with 2,762 people who had low-back pain, with or without sciatica. Its conclusion: traction, “either alone or in combination with other treatments, has little or no impact on pain intensity, functional status, global improvement and return to work” (Wegner, 2013).

Its limit matters. The review covers traction in general, manual and mechanical, and most of it was not inversion. So it does not prove that inversion tables fail. It does mean the broad claim that traction relieves back pain has not held up when tested in many trials.

The same review also recorded harm: seven of the 32 trials reported adverse effects, including “increased pain, aggravation of neurological signs and subsequent surgery” (Wegner, 2013).

The Newcastle Pilot: Fewer Operations in One Small Trial

The most encouraging result comes from a neurosurgical team in Newcastle, England, and it comes from one small pilot.

In a 2012 pilot trial, they randomized 24 patients with single-level lumbar disc disease who were already on the waiting list for surgery. Thirteen added inversion to physiotherapy; eleven had physiotherapy alone. In the inversion group, 10 of 13 avoided surgery. In the physiotherapy-only group, two patients did (Prasad, 2012).

Now the caveats. Pain and disability scores did not differ significantly between the groups, and neither did MRI results. The trial was a pilot, far too small to settle the question, and the authors themselves called for a larger one (Prasad, 2012). It tells you something about surgery decisions in this narrow group, not about back pain in general.

The Follow-Up Registry: 21% Against 39%

The same team later published a registry of 85 people who used inversion. Their two-year surgery rate was 21%, against 39% in a matched control group of neurosurgery patients; the control group reached 43% at four years (Mendelow, 2021).

This was not a randomized trial. People who chose inversion may differ from those who did not in ways that also affect surgery, and the study came from the same group as the pilot. It is a signal worth following up, not proof. Teeter, which makes inversion tables, supplied the tables and funded the study’s administrator; the authors state the analysis was independent (Mendelow, 2021).

The Pain Figures, and What They Can’t Show

The same registry also tracked symptoms, comparing each person with their own scores before treatment. Of 66 people followed up, 49 (74%) had a lower pain score; 75% improved on a standard disability index; the median pain score fell from 6 to 3 on a 10-point scale; and the share taking any pain medication fell from 73% to 49% (Mendelow, 2021).

These are the numbers behind claims like “74% pain reduction” that you will see in inversion table marketing, and they are real. What they cannot show is how much of the improvement came from inversion. There was no comparison group for these outcomes, and sciatica from a disc often eases on its own over weeks and months. The authors name the main limitation themselves: “patients were not randomised” (Mendelow, 2021).

Two figures that also circulate are not in the paper as stated: it gives 21% against 39% for surgery, not “50% less likely,” and it reports fewer people on pain medication, not that 39% stopped it.

Reading Both Sides Together

The large analysis says traction in general does little. One small pilot and one registry from the same team report that more people in the inversion groups avoided an operation, without clear gains in pain or disability scores in the pilot. Both can be true, and neither shows that a particular table will work for you.

If a disc is your reason for looking, our guide to inversion tables for a herniated disc goes into that group in more detail.

What Owners Report

What We Read

Studies are small, so we also read what owners say. In three long forum threads, on Mayo Clinic Connect, AnandTech and the Polk Audio forum, 19 people described their own results with an inversion table (Mayo Clinic Connect) (AnandTech Forums) (Polk Audio Forum). Thirteen reported relief. Six stopped because it made things worse or they could not tolerate it.

What the Positive Reports Have in Common

“The tingling goes away and it provides some relief,” one Mayo Clinic Connect member wrote. Another, with a herniated L4/5 disc, said “It made a big difference, for me.” Most of the positive reports describe partial angles, sessions of a few minutes, and use alongside exercise or other treatment.

What the Negative Reports Have in Common

The complaints are consistent too: blood rushing to the head, dizziness or vertigo, relief that fades once upright (“absolutely no permanent improvement,” one user wrote), pain that got worse with a lateral disc herniation, and one case of inguinal hernias after months of use.

Why This Is Not Evidence

These are self-selected stories from people who chose to post about their table, usually without a confirmed diagnosis and often while trying other treatments. They tell you what the experience is like. They cannot tell you whether the table caused the improvement.

Circulation and the Brain: The Claim Against the One Study That Exists

“Improves circulation” and “sends more oxygen to the brain” are among the most repeated inversion table benefits online. Here is what we found behind them. For the head-down position in general, not only on a table, see our page on hanging upside down benefits.

The Only Study on a Real Inversion Table

The one study we found that measured blood flow in the head during inversion on an actual inversion table was published in 2019. Using ultrasound, researchers found that the optic nerve sheath diameter, a marker of intracranial pressure, changed significantly between lying flat, three minutes of inversion, and returning flat. Blood flow in the internal carotid and middle cerebral arteries also changed significantly in velocity, resistance and pulsatility (Kondrashova, 2019).

Their conclusion was not “better circulation.” It was that “inversion therapy should be used with caution,” especially in anyone with a history of elevated intracranial pressure (Kondrashova, 2019).

What That Study Cannot Tell You

We read the abstract only; the full paper is not open access. The abstract does not give the size of the changes in millimeters or percentages, nor how many people took part or their ages. So we will not attach a number to it. What it does establish is direction and tone: the researchers who measured this directly saw a reason for caution, not a benefit.

Circulation and “Flushing Toxins”

We found no published study showing that inversion tables improve circulation in any health-relevant sense, or that they “flush toxins.” Blood does shift toward the head when you invert, which is exactly why blood pressure and eye pressure rise (Haskvitz, 1986). More blood in the head is not the same as healthier circulation.

Lymphatic Drainage and Headaches

The same is true for lymphatic drainage: we found no study. For headaches and migraines, a claim sometimes attributed to a named doctor, we found no study either. Before you invert to treat a headache, note that severe headaches appear on Teeter’s list of reasons not to invert without medical approval; our page on who should not use an inversion table covers that list.

What the Small Studies Found

The Spine Does Lengthen, While You Hang

This part of the traction idea has been measured. In a 1978 study of 20 healthy men, one minute upside down significantly increased spinal length (Nosse, 1978). In 1985, X-rays of 15 healthy men after 10 minutes of full inversion showed the lumbar vertebrae separating at every level measured (Kane, 1985), and in 20 people with chronic back pain the lower lumbar disc spaces widened by 0.3 to 4.0 mm (Gianakopoulos, 1985). A 1986 study of 18 young adults found the lower spine lengthened and its curves flattened during seven minutes on an inversion frame (Ballantyne, 1986).

All of these measured the spine during or right after one session. None showed how long the change lasts once you stand up.

Muscle Relaxation: Two Studies, Two Answers

In a 1985 study, 12 healthy people who inverted for two minutes showed a 28% drop in resting muscle tension, measured electrically, against 7% after the same time resting (deVries, 1985). The 1978 study also recorded quieter lower back muscles during inversion (Nosse, 1978). But a 2016 study of 60 healthy men found the opposite after six minutes: lower back muscle activity went up, and the authors concluded inversion may prevent relaxation (Kim, 2016). The honest summary is that short sessions relaxed the muscles in some studies and not in others.

Flexibility and Strength in People with Back Pain

The most encouraging trial here is a 2013 randomized study of 47 women with chronic low back pain. Over eight weeks, one group lay flat, one inverted to 30 degrees and one to 60 degrees, for three minutes, three times per session, four days a week. Pain improved in all three groups, and the 60 degree group did best on pain, lower back flexibility and back extensor strength (Kim, 2013). It was small, it included only women, and it has not been repeated, so it is a lead, not a verdict.

Inversion Against Standard Traction

A 2000 trial randomized 29 people with a herniated disc and sciatica to ten sessions of either inversion or conventional mechanical traction. Both groups improved clinically, with no significant difference between them; CT scans tended to favor the conventional machine (Güvenol, 2000). Without an untreated group, it cannot show how much of the improvement was time.

How Much Weight These Studies Can Carry

Every study in this section is small, most were done on healthy young adults, and most measured one session. Against them sits the Cochrane analysis of 32 traction trials, which found little or no effect on back pain (Wegner, 2013). What the small studies do establish is that the stretch is real and measurable. Whether it adds up to lasting relief is the part still unproven.

Posture, Flexibility and Muscle Relaxation

These are softer claims, and softer claims tend to go unmeasured.

A Measurement of Flexibility, on a Chair

The closest thing we found is a 1985 study of the Inverchair, a seated device that tips you back to 60 degrees, not a table. Vernon and colleagues put healthy young volunteers in it for three minutes.

In 40 of them, forward bending of the trunk increased by about 25%. In a separate group of 16 men, X-rays showed the two lowest lumbar disc spaces, L4-5 and L5-S1, widening by about 1 to 2.2 mm on average (Vernon et al., 1985). That is a measured version of the traction idea above: the discs did separate a little.

Read it with its limits. The study was funded by the Inverchair’s maker, it had no control group, and everyone in it was healthy with no back symptoms. It measured immediate effects only, during a single three-minute session. It says nothing about pain relief, about whether the gain in flexibility or the disc widening lasts once you are upright, or about posture over time.

What Is Reasonable to Expect

Inversion is a passive stretch through the spine, and many people enjoy the sensation. That is a fair reason to use one if your doctor agrees. It is not evidence of a lasting change in how you stand. If posture is your goal, a physical therapist can test what is actually limiting it.

The Risks, in Brief

A page about benefits that skipped the risks would not be honest. We cover them in depth elsewhere, so this is only the outline.

What the Body Does Upside Down

Blood pressure rises (Haskvitz, 1986), eye pressure roughly doubles (Weinreb, 1984), and blood flow and intracranial pressure shift (Kondrashova, 2019). That is why high blood pressure, heart disease and glaucoma sit at the top of the list of reasons not to invert without clearance. The full list is on our page about inversion table contraindications.

Falls and the FDA Gap

A 2021 case report described three cervical spinal cord injuries from inversion table falls, where the user landed on the top of the head (Jung, 2021). It is three cases, so it tells you what a fall looks like, not how often it happens. Separately, the FDA’s device reporting database lists serious injuries from inversion table therapy, including spinal cord injury, fractures and death; yet the FDA regulates only tables whose makers claim a medical use, and most makers do not (Kassay, 2023). For headaches, dizziness and the other effects people report during and after a session, see our page on inversion table side effects.

If You Decide to Try It

If your doctor clears you, follow the maker’s manual and any limits your doctor gives you; no study here tells you how to progress.

Choose a Table That Controls the Angle

A table that limits its angle lets you set the limit before you get on. Teeter’s X3 and LX9 mark 20, 40 and 60 degrees on the tether, and Innova’s ITX9600 uses a pin whose angles are listed in its manual:

20°Lowest tether mark
40°Middle mark
60°Highest mark

The three angles marked on the Teeter FitSpine X3 and LX9 tether, drawn to scale. Each mark limits how far the table tips back, set before you get on.

Here is how two common tables compare on angle control, ankle system and regulatory status, from the manufacturers’ published specifications:

Teeter FitSpine X3 inversion table with a grey flexible bed dotted with blue acupressure nodes, blue ankle clamps with a long reach handle, and a black steel frame — Sources: Teeter FitSpine X3 · Innova ITX9600

Innova ITX9600 inversion table with a black and grey padded backrest, an adjustable headrest, a lumbar pillow and ankle holders, on a grey steel frame — Sources: Teeter FitSpine X3 · Innova ITX9600

Angle control and FDA status, from the manufacturers' published specs
Spec	Teeter FitSpine X3Premium, price tier 3 of 3Maker source	Innova ITX9600Budget, price tier 1 of 3Maker source
Angle control	EZ-Angle tether marked at 20°, 40° and 60°; full inversion with secure lockout	Pin with protective cover; the manual labels the settings 15°, 30°, 45°, 60° and 85° (the product page calls it a six-position pin)
Ankle system	Deluxe EZ-Reach ankle lock, extra-long handle, micro-adjusting closure	Reversible ankle holders (foam rollers and U-shaped holders can trade places)
FDA	510(k) cleared (K162702), Class I device	Not stated
Weight capacity	300 lb	300 lb
User height	4'8" to 6'6"	4'10" to 6'6"
Warranty	5 years (extension to 10 sold separately)Highest here	1 year limited
Assembly and setup	85% pre-assembled, BILT app instructions (brand-wide claim)	Not stated
Buy	See today's price: Teeter FitSpine X3 on Amazon (opens in a new tab)	Not linked

Teeter lists the X3 as a registered 510(k) medical device, which ties back to the FDA gap above; Innova does not state an FDA status for the ITX9600, and it sets the angle with a pin whose degrees appear only in the owner’s manual (15° to 85°), not on the product page. Neither fact tells you the table will help your back. They tell you how much control and oversight you are buying. For a longer look at the brand, see our Teeter inversion table reviews.

Keep Sessions Short

For context, the blood pressure trial measured two minutes and the eye pressure study five. How often and at what angle to progress is its own topic, covered in our beginner inversion exercises.

Set a Realistic Expectation

If you try inversion for a disc problem, the published data are limited to what the Newcastle work reports: in a pilot of 24, more patients in the inversion group avoided surgery, with no clear difference in pain or disability scores; in a registry with no control group for pain, most patients followed up reported less pain. Track how you feel, stop if pain, tingling or weakness gets worse, and bring the results to your doctor. That is a smaller promise than most inversion table benefits lists make. It is also the one the evidence can keep.

Your questions, answered

Frequently Asked Questions

Do inversion tables really work for lower back pain?

For some people, in the short term, and the evidence is thin. Small trials report less pain or better flexibility in selected groups, while larger analyses of traction find little or no difference. Nothing published shows a table outperforming time plus standard physical therapy, so check with a clinician before relying on one for a back problem.

Do inversion tables really decompress the spine?

Yes, while you are on the table. X-ray studies from the 1980s measured lumbar disc spaces widening by up to about 4 mm during inversion. What no study has shown is how long that separation lasts once you stand up, and a Cochrane team found traction in general does little for back pain.

Do inversions help lymphatic drainage?

No published study we could find shows that. The claim appears on many fitness and wellness sites, usually without a citation. The one study that measured blood flow in the head during inversion on an actual table found significant changes in flow and in a marker of intracranial pressure, and its authors concluded inversion should be used with caution.

Are inversions good for the brain?

There is no evidence that they are. We found no study showing better memory, focus or mood from inverting. The only ultrasound study on a real inversion table found measurable shifts in brain artery flow and a pressure marker behind the eye within three minutes, and the researchers took that as a reason for caution, not a benefit.

What works better than an inversion table?

We found no head-to-head trial comparing inversion tables with other back treatments, so no one can name a proven winner. What is known: a Cochrane analysis rated traction of all kinds as having little or no effect on pain and function. A clinician who examines your back can point you to options with a better record for your specific problem.

How many minutes a day should you use an inversion table?

There is no evidence-based daily total, and we cannot prescribe one. Researchers who studied fall injuries recommended short sessions, and the blood pressure and eye pressure studies measured two and five minutes. Those are authors' recommendations and study durations, not clearance for you: follow the maker's manual and ask your clinician.

Do doctors recommend inversion tables?

Some do for selected patients, many don't, and there is no official endorsement. The strongest supportive data come from one neurosurgical team in England, whose small trial and registry found fewer disc operations among inversion users. Against that, a large Cochrane analysis found traction does little for back pain, and eye specialists advise glaucoma patients to avoid inverting.

22 sources used for this guide

Each linked to the original. Citations in the text jump here.

View sources

Kassay A, Soliman MAR, Jhawar BS. Recommendations for inversion table therapy. Disability and Rehabilitation 2023;45(22):3779-3782.
Haskvitz EM, Hanten WP. Blood pressure response to inversion traction. Physical Therapy 1986;66(9):1361-1364.
Weinreb RN, Cook J, Friberg TR. Effect of inverted body position on intraocular pressure. American Journal of Ophthalmology 1984;98(6):784-787.
Kondrashova T, Makar M, Proctor C, Bridgmon KA, Pazdernik V. Dynamic assessment of cerebral blood flow and intracranial pressure during inversion table tilt using ultrasonography. Journal of the Neurological Sciences 2019;404:150-156.
Wegner I, Widyahening IS, van Tulder MW et al. Traction for low-back pain with or without sciatica. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2013, CD003010.
Prasad KS, Gregson BA, Hargreaves G, Byrnes T, Winburn P, Mendelow AD. Inversion therapy in patients with pure single level lumbar discogenic disease: a pilot randomized trial. Disability and Rehabilitation 2012;34(17):1473-1480.
Mendelow AD, Gregson BA, Mitchell P et al. Lumbar disc disease: the effect of inversion on clinical symptoms and a comparison of the rate of surgery after inversion therapy with the rate of surgery in neurosurgery controls. Journal of Physical Therapy Science 2021;33(11):801-808.
Mayo Clinic Connect members. What are people's experience with Inversion tables?. Mayo Clinic Connect discussion thread, 2021-2023.
AnandTech Forums members. Just got an inversion table. AnandTech Forums discussion thread, 2011.
Polk Audio Forum members. Inversion table experience-knowledge anyone?. Polk Audio Forum discussion thread, 2010.
Nosse LJ. Inverted spinal traction. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 1978;59(8):367-370.
Kane MD, Karl RD, Swain JH. Effects of gravity-facilitated traction on intervertebral dimensions of the lumbar spine. Journal of Orthopaedic and Sports Physical Therapy 1985;6(5):281-288.
Gianakopoulos G, Waylonis GW, Grant PA, Tottle DO, Blazek JV. Inversion devices: their role in producing lumbar distraction. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 1985;66(2):100-102.
Ballantyne BT, Reser MD, Lorenz GW, Smidt GL. The effects of inversion traction on spinal column configuration, heart rate, blood pressure, and perceived discomfort. Journal of Orthopaedic and Sports Physical Therapy 1986;7(5):254-260.
deVries HA, Cailliet R. Vagotonic effect of inversion therapy upon resting neuromuscular tension. American Journal of Physical Medicine 1985;64(3):119-129.
Kim CY, Kang JH. Analysis of electromyographic activities of the lumbar erector spinae caused by inversion traction. Journal of Physical Therapy Science 2016;28(4):1238-1240.
Kim JD, Oh HW, Lee JH, Cha JY, Ko IG, Jee YS. The effect of inversion traction on pain sensation, lumbar flexibility and trunk muscles strength in patients with chronic low back pain. Isokinetics and Exercise Science 2013;21(3):237-246.
Güvenol K, Tüzün C, Peker Ö, Göktay Y. A comparison of inverted spinal traction and conventional traction in the treatment of lumbar disc herniations. Physiotherapy Theory and Practice 2000;16(3):151-160.
Vernon H, Meschino J, Naiman J. Inversion therapy: a study of physiological effects. Journal of the Canadian Chiropractic Association 1985;29(3):135-140.
Jung SH, Hwang JM, Kim CH. Inversion Table Fall Injury, the Phantom Menace: Three Case Reports on Cervical Spinal Cord Injury. Healthcare (Basel) 2021;9(5):492.
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Low back pain and sciatica in over 16s: assessment and management, Recommendations. NICE guideline NG59, published 30 November 2016, last updated 29 July 2026.
Qaseem A, Wilt TJ, McLean RM, Forciea MA, Clinical Guidelines Committee of the American College of Physicians, et al. Noninvasive Treatments for Acute, Subacute, and Chronic Low Back Pain: A Clinical Practice Guideline From the American College of Physicians. Annals of Internal Medicine 2017;166(7):514-530.