Trial reportRheumatology international2013
Is phonophoresis effective in the treatment of chronic low back pain? A single-blind randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in Rheumatology international, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Therapeutic ultrasound for chronic low back pain.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020Pooled it
- Comparative short-term effectiveness of ibuprofen gel and cream phonophoresis in patients with knee osteoarthritis.Rheumatology international · 2018Trial
- Predictors for Poor Outcomes at Six Months on Pain, Disability, Psychological and Health Status in Greek Patients with Chronic Low Back Pain After Receiving Physiotherapy: A Prospective Cohort Study.Clinics and practice · 2025Article
- Pharmacological interventions for patients with chronic primary musculoskeletal pain: disparity between synthesized evidence and real-world clinical practice.Pain reports · 2025Article
- Assessing a GPS-Based 6-Minute Walk Test for People With Persistent Pain: Validation Study.JMIR formative research · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this trial is to investigate and compare the effects of phonophoresis (PP) and ultrasound (US) therapy on pain, disability, trunk muscle strength, walking performance, spinal mobility, quality of life (QOL), and depression in the patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP). A total of 60 patients with definite CLBP were included in this study. The patients were randomized into three groups. Group 1 (n = 20) was accepted as the control group and was given only exercises. Group 2 (n = 20) received US treatment and exercises. Group 3 (n = 20) received PP and exercises. All of the programs were performed 3 days a week, for 6 weeks. The pain (visual analog scale, VAS), disability (Oswestry Disability Questionnaire, ODQ and pain disability index, PDI), walking performance (6 min walking test, 6MWT), depression (Beck Depression Inventory scores, BDI), and QOL (Short Form 36, SF-36) of all participants were evaluated. The trunk muscle strength was measured with a handheld dynamometer. All of the groups showed statistically significant improvements in pain, disability, muscle strength, endurance, 6MWT, mobility, QOL, and depression. The intergroup comparison showed significant differences in VAS pain, 6MWT, and EMS, among three groups. These differences were statistically significant in groups 2 and 3 compared with the group 1. The intergroup comparison showed significant difference in pain, physical function, and energy subgroups of SF-36. The differences were statistically in group 3 compared with group 1 and 2. We observed that US and PP treatments were effective in the treatment of patients with CLBP but PP was not found to be superior over ultrasound therapy.
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.