Clinical Rehabilitation

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to register today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Pengel, H. M
Right arrow Articles by Refshauge, K. M
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Pengel, H. M
Right arrow Articles by Refshauge, K. M
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Clinical Rehabilitation, Vol. 16, No. 8, 811-820 (2002)
DOI: 10.1191/0269215502cr562oa
© 2002 SAGE Publications

Reviews

Systematic review of conservative interventions for subacute low back pain

Heloise M Pengel

School of Physiotherapy, Sydney, Australia

Chris G Maher

School of Physiotherapy and Centre for Evidence-based Physiotherapy, Sydney, Australia

Kathryn M Refshauge

School of Physiotherapy, the University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia

Objective: To evaluate the effect of conservative interventions on clinically relevant outcome measures for patients with subacute low back pain. This is particularly important because effective treatment for subacute low back pain will prevent the transition to chronic low back pain, a condition that is largely responsible for the high health care costs of low back pain.

Design: Systematic review of randomized controlled trials.

Main outcome measures: Methodological quality of each trial was assessed. Effect sizes and 95% confidence intervals were calculated for pain and disability and risk ratios for return to work.

Results: Thirteen trials were located, evaluating the following interventions: manipulation, back school, exercise, advice, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS), hydrotherapy, massage, corset, cognitive behavioural treatment and co-ordination of primary health care. Most studies were of low quality and did not show a statistically significant effect of intervention. For the strict duration of low back pain (six weeks to three months), no evidence of high internal validity was found but when other methodological criteria were considered, evidence was found for the efficacy of advice. Furthermore, there is evidence that when a broader view is taken of the duration of subacute low back pain (seven days to six months), other treatments (e.g. manipulation, exercise, TENS) may be effective.

Conclusions: Our review identified a major gap in the evidence for interventions that are currently recommended in clinical practice guidelines for the treatment of subacute low back pain. Lack of a uniform definition of subacute low back pain further limited current evidence.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
ptjournalHome page
S. A. Olivo, L. G. Macedo, I. C. Gadotti, J. Fuentes, T. Stanton, and D. J Magee
Scales to Assess the Quality of Randomized Controlled Trials: A Systematic Review
Physical Therapy, February 1, 2008; 88(2): 156 - 175.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
ANN INTERN MEDHome page
R. Chou, A. Qaseem, V. Snow, D. Casey, J. T. Cross Jr, P. Shekelle, D. K. Owens, and for the Clinical Efficacy Assessment Subcommittee
Diagnosis and Treatment of Low Back Pain: A Joint Clinical Practice Guideline from the American College of Physicians and the American Pain Society
Ann Intern Med, October 2, 2007; 147(7): 478 - 491.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
ANN INTERN MEDHome page
R. Chou and L. H. Huffman
Nonpharmacologic Therapies for Acute and Chronic Low Back Pain: A Review of the Evidence for an American Pain Society/American College of Physicians Clinical Practice Guideline
Ann Intern Med, October 2, 2007; 147(7): 492 - 504.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
ANN INTERN MEDHome page
L. H.M. Pengel, K. M. Refshauge, C. G. Maher, M. K. Nicholas, R. D. Herbert, and P. McNair
Physiotherapist-Directed Exercise, Advice, or Both for Subacute Low Back Pain: A Randomized Trial
Ann Intern Med, June 5, 2007; 146(11): 787 - 796.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
ANN INTERN MEDHome page
J. A. Hayden, M. W. van Tulder, A. V. Malmivaara, and B. W. Koes
Meta-Analysis: Exercise Therapy for Nonspecific Low Back Pain
Ann Intern Med, May 3, 2005; 142(9): 765 - 775.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
ANN INTERN MEDHome page
W. J.J. Assendelft, S. C. Morton, E. I. Yu, M. J. Suttorp, and P. G. Shekelle
Spinal Manipulative Therapy for Low Back Pain: A Meta-Analysis of Effectiveness Relative to Other Therapies
Ann Intern Med, June 3, 2003; 138(11): 871 - 881.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]