Addition of Choice of Complementary Therapies to Usual Care for Acute Low Back Pain

Eisenberg, David M.; Post, Diana E.; Davis, Roger B.; Connelly, Maureen T.; Legedza, Anna; Hrbek, Andrea; Prosser, Lisa A.; Buring, Julie E.; Inui, Thomas S.; Cherkin, Daniel C.

doi:10.1097/01.brs.0000252697.07214.65

Cited by 83 publications

(68 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…20 If this is true, the use of placebo or sham controlled trial designs in evaluating acupuncture interventions may generate false 'negative' results (if interpreted as sham) and treatments may be withheld that are safe and cost effective. [23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34] An assumption is a proposition that is taken for granted as if it were known to be true.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Emperors Sham – Wrong Assumption that Sham Needling is Sham

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

During the last five years a large number of randomised controlled clinical trials (RCTs) have been published on the efficacy of acupuncture in different conditions. In most of these studies verum is compared with sham acupuncture. In general both verum and sham have been found to be effective, and often with little reported difference in outcome. This has repeatedly led to the conclusion that acupuncture is no more effective than placebo treatment. However, this conclusion is based on the assumption that sham acupuncture is inert. Since sham acupuncture evidently is merely another form of acupuncture from the physiological perspective, the assumption that sham is sham is incorrect and conclusions based on this assumption are therefore invalid. Clinical guidelines based on such conclusions may therefore exclude suffering patients from valuable treatments.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Emperors Sham – Wrong Assumption that Sham Needling is Sham

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Eisenburg et al 29 Hurley et al 30 Haas et al 31 Teyhen et al 32 Brennan et al Roberts et al 13 Penttinen et al 18 Heymans et al 34 Kendrick et al 35 Yip et al 36 Frerick et al 37 Lee et al 38 Grunnesjo et al 39 Marshall et al 40 Gabis et al 41 Chiradejnant et al 42 5. Unable to classify due to inadequate information Tuzun et al 12 Kaapa et al…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[23][24][25][26][27] Some studies only excluded patients when motor, reflex or sensory deficits were present. [28][29][30][31][32][33] Other studies did not appear to Figure 2 Criteria for exclusion of nerve root involvement (n550). a, motor, sensory, reflex changes; b, leg pain greater than back pain; x, pain radiates below the knee; d, reduced straight leg raise which reproduces pain.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

A literature review reveals that trials evaluating treatment of non-specific low back pain use inconsistent criteria to identify serious pathologies and nerve root involvement

Williams

Hancock

Ferreira

et al. 2012

Journal of Manual & Manipulative Therapy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives:The broad aim of this study was to assess the homogeneity of patients included in trials of nonspecific low back pain (NSLBP). To do this, we investigated the consistency and clarity of criteria used to identify and exclude participants with serious pathologies and nerve root compromise in randomized controlled trials, investigating interventions for NSLBP. Methods: We searched Medline database for randomized controlled trials of low back pain (LBP). published between 2000 and 2009. We then randomly selected and screened trials for inclusion until we had 50 eligible trials. Data were extracted on the criteria used to identify cases of serious conditions (e.g. cancer, fracture) and nerve root involvement. Results: The majority of papers (35/50) explicitly excluded patients with serious pathology. However, the terminology used and examples given were highly variable. Nerve root involvement was an exclusion criterion in the majority but not all studies. The criteria used for excluding patients with nerve root involvement varied greatly between studies. The most common criteria were 'motor, sensory or reflex changes' (nine studies), followed by 'pain radiating below the knee' (five studies) and 'reduced straight leg raise which reproduces leg pain' (five studies). In half of the included studies, the criteria used, while alluding to nerve root involvement, were not explained adequately for us to determine the types of patients included or excluded. Discussion: The inconsistent and unclear criteria used to identify cases of serious pathology and nerve root compromise means that published trials of LBP likely include heterogeneous patient populations. This trait limits our ability to make comparisons across trials or pool studies. Standardization and consensus is important for future research.

show abstract

“…Complementary and alternative approaches include yoga, meditation, acupuncture, and massage therapy (Eisenberg et al, 2007;Kabat-Zinn et al, 1985;Quinn, Hughes, & Baxter, 2006). Cognitive behavioral therapies have also been found to be effective in reducing symptoms (Ostelo et al, 2005).…”

Section: Treatment Of Clbpmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Treatment decisions based on physician preference or practice style can significantly influence back treatment success or failure when patient expectations are not considered in treatment selection (Butler & Johnson, 2008;Eisenberg et al, 2007) and when evidence-based guidelines are not used to guide care (Webster, Courtney, Huang, Matz, & Christiani, 2005). Failure to consider patient-related factors or to adhere to the CPGs also influences costs of care (Chou, 2005).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Characteristics and Outcomes of Individuals Self-Selecting Yoga versus Physical Therapy for the Treatment of Chronic Low Back Pain

Evans¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Addition of Choice of Complementary Therapies to Usual Care for Acute Low Back Pain

Cited by 83 publications

References 25 publications

The Emperors Sham – Wrong Assumption that Sham Needling is Sham

The Emperors Sham – Wrong Assumption that Sham Needling is Sham

A literature review reveals that trials evaluating treatment of non-specific low back pain use inconsistent criteria to identify serious pathologies and nerve root involvement

Characteristics and Outcomes of Individuals Self-Selecting Yoga versus Physical Therapy for the Treatment of Chronic Low Back Pain

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About