Local and Remote Sustained Trigger Point Therapy for Exacerbations of Chronic Low Back Pain

Abstract

Neuroreflexotherapy intervention seems to be a simple and effective treatment for rapid amelioration of pain episodes in patients with chronic low back pain. At this time, the duration of pain relief beyond 45 days has not been evaluated.

Chapter 4 European guidelines for the management of chronic nonspecific low back pain

“…In the RCTs in which NRT was compared to a sham procedure (Kovacs et al 1993, Kovacs et al 1997), adverse events included transient cutaneous discomfort (itching, irritation and redness) after insertion of the surgical staples in 4% to 13% of cases (7% to 11% in the sham group), and limited dermal infection in 0% to 2% of cases (0% to 3% in the sham group). Dermal infection was successfully treated with an antibiotic cream in less than 48 hours in all cases, and none of the patients required extraction of the staples before they were planned to be removed , Kovacs et al 1997.…”

“…Dermal infection was successfully treated with an antibiotic cream in less than 48 hours in all cases, and none of the patients required extraction of the staples before they were planned to be removed , Kovacs et al 1997.…”

“…Two were double-blind randomized controlled clinical trials of NRT versus a sham procedure, consisting of the implantation of epidermal devices up to 5cm away from the appropriate target zones. Both studies focused on the effect of NRT for treating exacerbations of low back pain and had a short-term follow-up (up to 45 days) , Kovacs et al 1997. The third study was a cluster randomized controlled trial in which physicians (i.e.…”

“…Two high quality studies showed a statistically significant reduction in the severity of pain, whether local or referred, in the NRT group, at the end of the follow-up period (30 and 45 days, respectively) (Kovacs et al 1993, Kovacs et al 1997). Quality of life was only assessed in one study, and showed a slightly more favourable result in the intervention group for the subscale "change in quality of life" of the COOP charts (Kovacs et al 1997) (N.B.…”

“…Quality of life was only assessed in one study, and showed a slightly more favourable result in the intervention group for the subscale "change in quality of life" of the COOP charts (Kovacs et al 1997) (N.B. this data is wrongly reported in the tables of both the original study (Kovacs et al 1997) and the Cochrane review (Urrutia et al 2004); data for control and intervention groups have been reversed.) There were no differences found for the variables "overall health" and "overall quality of life" (Kovacs et al 1997).…”