SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2007
WITHDRAWN: Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for low-back pain.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 64 citations in OpenAlex.
- [Orthopedic specialists in an interdisciplinary setting. Multimodal therapy for chronic back pain].Der Orthopade · 2009Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNon-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are the most frequently prescribed medications worldwide and are widely used for patients with low back pain.
objectivesThe objective of this systematic review was to assess the effects of NSAIDs in the treatment of non-specific low back pain and to assess which type of NSAID is most effective. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Medline and Embase databases and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (CCTR) up to and including September 1998 if reported in English, Dutch or German. We also screened references given in relevant reviews and identified trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised trials and double-blind controlled trials of NSAIDs in non-specific low back pain with or without radiation were included. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors blinded with respect to authors, institution and journal independently extracted data and assessed methodological quality. A methodological quality score was applied, and studies meeting at least six of 11 specified criteria were considered high quality studies. If data were considered clinically homogeneous, a meta-analysis was performed using a fixed effects model for statistically homogeneous subgroups and a random effects model for statistically heterogeneous subgroups. If data were considered clinically heterogeneous, a qualitative analysis was performed using a rating system with four levels of evidence (strong, moderate, limited, no). MAIN
resultsA total of 51 trials (total number of patients = 6057) were included in this review, of which 46 were published in English and five in German. Sixteen trials (31%) were of high quality. The pooled Relative Risk for global improvement after one week was 1.24 (95% CI 1.10 , 1.41) and for additional analgesic use 1.29 (95% CI 1.05 , 1.57), indicating a statistically significant effect in favour of NSAIDs compared to placebo. The results of the qualitative analysis showed that there is conflicting evidence (level 3) that NSAIDs are more effective than paracetamol for acute low back pain, and that there is moderate evidence (level 2) that NSAIDs are not more effective than other drugs for acute low back pain. There is strong evidence (level 1) that various types of NSAIDs are equally effective for acute low back pain. AUTHORS'
conclusionsIn conclusion, the evidence from the 51 trials included in this review suggests that NSAIDs are effective for short-term symptomatic relief in patients with acute low back pain. Furthermore, there does not seem to be a specific type of NSAID which is clearly more effective than others. Sufficient evidence on chronic low back pain is still lacking.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.