Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21596740›Full record

Trial reportBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2011

Surgery with disc prosthesis versus rehabilitation in patients with low back pain and degenerative disc: two year follow-up of randomised study.

Christian Hellum, Lars Gunnar Johnsen, Kjersti Storheim, Oystein P Nygaard, Jens Ivar Brox, Ivar Rossvoll, Magne Rø, Leiv Sandvik, Oliver Grundnes, Norwegian Spine Study Group

2 registry-linked trialsOpen access · hybridAbstract readComparative StudyMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 49 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
49citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
11.7field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT00394732 nacompletednot on this map

Effect of Lumbar Disc Prosthesis Versus Multidisciplinary Rehabilitation Program in Patients With Chronic Low Back Pain and Degenerative Disc. A Prospective Randomized Clinical Multicentre Trial.

TypeinterventionalSponsorUllevaal University HospitalRan2004 to 2007Enrolled179ConditionsChronic Low Back Pain, Degenerative Disc DiseaseArmsTotal Disc Prosthesis, Multidisciplinary rehabilitation program
NCT01704677 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2012, after this paper: background citation

Lumbar Disc Prosthesis Versus Multidisciplinary Rehabilitation in Chronic Back Pain and Localized Degenerative Disc. Long Term Follow-up of a Randomized Multicentre Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorOslo University HospitalRan2012 to 2015Enrolled151ConditionsChronic Low Back PainArmsLumbar total disc replacement, Multidisciplinary rehabilitation
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

49 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 121 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Multidisciplinary biopsychosocial rehabilitation for chronic low back pain.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2014
    Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Lumbar total disc replacement: predictors for long-term outcome.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2018
    Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Five-year follow-up of total disc replacement compared to fusion: a randomized controlled trial.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2013
    Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Predictors of outcome after surgery with disc prosthesis and rehabilitation in patients with chronic low back pain and degenerative disc: 2-year follow-up.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2012
    Trial
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Christian HellumDepartment of Orthopaedics, Oslo University Hospital and University of Oslo, Kirkevn 166, 0407 Oslo, Norway. christian.hellum@medisin.uio.no
Lars Gunnar Johnsen
Kjersti Storheim
Oystein P Nygaard
Jens Ivar Brox
Ivar Rossvoll
Magne Rø
Leiv Sandvik
Oliver Grundnes
Norwegian Spine Study Group
University of Oslo · NONorwegian University of Science and Technology · NOSt Olav's University Hospital · NONorwegian Group (Norway) · NOOslo University Hospital · NO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo compare the efficacy of surgery with disc prosthesis versus non-surgical treatment for patients with chronic low back pain.

designA prospective randomised multicentre study.

settingFive university hospitals in Norway.

participants173 patients with a history of low back pain for at least one year, Oswestry disability index of at least 30 points, and degenerative changes in one or two lower lumbar spine levels (86 patients randomised to surgery). Patients were treated from April 2004 to September 2007.

interventionsSurgery with disc prosthesis or outpatient multidisciplinary rehabilitation for 12-15 days.

main outcome measuresThe primary outcome measure was the score on the Oswestry disability index after two years. Secondary outcome measures were low back pain, satisfaction with life (SF-36 and EuroQol EQ-5D), Hopkins symptom check list (HSCL-25), fear avoidance beliefs (FABQ), self efficacy beliefs for pain, work status, and patients' satisfaction and drug use. A blinded independent observer evaluated scores on the back performance scale and Prolo scale at two year follow-up.

resultsThe study was powered to detect a difference of 10 points on the Oswestry disability index between the groups at two years. At two years there was a mean difference of -8.4 points (95% confidence interval -13.2 to -3.6) in favour of surgery. In the analysis of prespecified secondary outcomes, there were significant differences in favour of surgery for low back pain (mean difference -12.2, -21.3 to -3.1), patients' satisfaction (63% (n = 46) v 39% (n = 26)), SF-36 physical component score (mean difference 5.8, 2.5 to 9.1), self efficacy for pain (mean difference 1.0, 0.2 to 1.9), and the Prolo scale (mean difference 0.9, 0.1 to 1.6). There were no significant differences in return to work, SF-36 mental component score, EQ-5D, fear avoidance beliefs, Hopkins symptom check list, drug use, and the back performance scale. One serious complication of leg amputation occurred during surgical revision of a polyethylene dislodgement. The drop-out rate was 20% (34) and the crossover rate was 6% (5).

conclusionsSurgical intervention with disc prosthesis for chronic low back pain resulted in a significantly greater improvement in the Oswestry score compared with rehabilitation, but this improvement did not clearly exceed the prespecified minimally important clinical difference between groups of 10 points, and the data are consistent with a wide range of differences between the groups, including values well below 10 points. The potential risks of surgery and the substantial amount of improvement experienced by a sizeable proportion of the rehabilitation group also have to be incorporated into overall decision making. Trial registration NCT 00394732.

Indexed as

AdultChronic DiseaseHumansIntervertebral DiscIntervertebral Disc DegenerationLow Back PainLumbar VertebraeMiddle AgedPatient SatisfactionProspective StudiesProsthesis ImplantationTreatment OutcomeYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID21596740
PMCPMC3100911
OpenAlexW2056626132

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.