Background: There are limited number of studies comparing non-surgical spinal decompression with other treatment options such as conventional motor traction in the treatment of low back pain caused by lumbar discopathy. This retrospective study aimed to compare the effectiveness of these treatments. Methods: Retrospective data of patients who had physical therapy in our clinic with the diagnosis of lumbar dyscopathy were reviewed. Demographic datas, duration of their symptoms, physical examination findings, lumbosacral magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) reports, method and duration of treatment and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) results were recorded. Results: A total of 160 patients met the inclusion criteria. Their mean age was 44.6±12.4 (range 21-65) years, 57.5% (n=92) was female, and 42.5% (n=68) was male. There were no differences between the conventional physiotherapy, motorized traction, and spinal decompression groups in terms of age, duration of symptoms, and the number of sessions (p>0.05). In both three groups, the mean scores of VAS and ODI were significantly decreased in the pre-and post-treatment comparisons (p<0.005). The rates of change in VAS and ODI were higher in the traction group and spinal decompression group compared to the conventional treatment (p<0.005). Conclusion: In patients with subacute and chronic lumbar dyscopathies, motorized traction and spinal decompression treatments added to conventional treatment were found to be more effective than conventional treatment alone. The results of spinal decompression and conventional motorized traction treatments appear to be similar. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier number of the study is NCT05617924. Keywords: Low back pain, intervertebral disc, traction, decompression

ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to research the clinical effectiveness of high-intensity laser therapy combined with exercise on pain, quality of life, and disability in patients with cervical radiculopathy and compared it with that of placebo and exercise alone.DesignNinety participants with cervical radiculopathy were randomized into the following three groups: high-intensity laser therapy + exercise (n = 30), placebo + exercise (n = 30), and exercise only (n = 30). Pain, cervical range of motion, disability, and quality of life (36-item Short Form Health Survey) were assessed at baseline and weeks 4 and 12.ResultsThe mean age of the patients (66.7% female) was 48.9 ± 9.3 yrs. Pain intensity in the arm and neck, neuropathic and radicular pain levels, disability, and several parameters of the 36-item Short Form Health Survey showed an improvement in the short and medium term in all three groups. These improvements were greater in the high-intensity laser therapy + exercise group than in the other two groups.ConclusionsHigh-intensity laser therapy + exercise was much more effective in improving medium-term radicular pain, quality of life, and functionality in patients with cervical radiculopathy. Thus, high-intensity laser therapy should be considered for the management of cervical radiculopathy.To Claim CME CreditsComplete the self-assessment activity and evaluation online at http://www.physiatry.org/JournalCMECME ObjectivesAt the conclusion of this article, readers will be able to: (1) Define cervical radicular pain and its clinical presentation, and explain the main pathomechanism in cervical radiculopathy (CR); (2) Describe the effects of laser administration on neuropathic pain; and (3) Discuss the clinical significance of coadministration of high-intensity laser therapy (HILT) with exercise (HILT + EX) in CR.LevelAdvancedAccreditationThe Association of Academic Physiatrists is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians.The Association of Academic Physiatrists designates this Journal-based CME activity for a maximum of 1.0 AMA PRA Category 1 Credit(s)™. Physicians should only claim credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity.

Objectives: We evaluated pain, fatigue, anxiety, depression, and quality of life in patients hospitalized for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and observed them over a period of 3 months. We also investigated the relationship of these symptoms to age, gender, disease severity, and levels of anxiety and depression.Methods: The study included 100 confirmed COVID-19 patients (i.e., positive on a polymerase chain reaction test) between the ages of 18 and 75 years. Pain (visual analog scale [VAS]), fatigue (fatigue severity scale), anxiety, and depression (hospital anxiety and depression scales) were evaluated on the first day of hospitalization and at 1-month and 3-month follow-ups. The short form-12 questionnaire was used to measure quality of life at the 1-month and 3-month follow-ups.Results: No differences were found in pain, fatigue, anxiety levels, depression levels, and quality of life according to disease severity. High VAS scores at hospital admission were related to continued pain at the 3-month follow-up (odds ratio [OR], 1.067; p<0.001). High VAS (OR, 1.072; p=0.003) and anxiety levels (OR, 1.360; p<0.007) were related to severe fatigue at the 3-month evaluation.Conclusion: Pain, fatigue, anxiety, and depression appear to be long-term sequelae of COVID-19 and can affect quality of life. High VAS and anxiety levels were found to be associated with long-term fatigue.