Trial reportSpine2014
A randomized clinical trial comparing extensible and inextensible lumbosacral orthoses and standard care alone in the management of lower back pain.
Trial report in Spine, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05100381 (Effectiveness of Dry Needling on Pain, Functional Disability, Postural Control and Pain Pressure Threshold in Patients With Chronic Nonspecific Low Back Pain), which is not on this map. Cited by 13 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.
Effectiveness of Dry Needling on Pain, Functional Disability, Postural Control and Pain Pressure Threshold in Patients With Chronic Nonspecific Low Back Pain: A Double-Blind Randomised Controlled Trial
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A systematic review of randomised controlled trials assessing effectiveness of prosthetic and orthotic interventions.PloS one · 2018Pooled it
- Postoperative spinal orthosis may not be necessary for minimally invasive lumbar spine fusion surgery: a prospective randomized controlled trial.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2021Trial
- Effectiveness of lumbar supports in low back functionality and disability in assembly-line workers.Industrial health · 2019Trial
- Efficacy of Back Bracing in Treating Chronic Low Back Pain.Brain sciences · 2024Article
- The Role of Orthoses in Chronic Axial Spinal Conditions.Current pain and headache reports · 2024Review
- Article
- Effects of non-extensible lumbar belts on static and dynamic postural stability.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2023Article
- A Pilot Study of Varying Thoracic and Abdominal Compression in a Reconfigurable Trunk Exoskeleton During Different Activities.IEEE transactions on bio-medical engineering · 2020Article
- Effectiveness of orthoses for treatment in patients with spinal pain.Yeungnam University journal of medicine · 2020Article
- Changes in Lumbo-Pelvic Coordination of Individuals With and Without Low Back Pain When Wearing a Hip Orthosis.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2020Article
- Immediate Effects of Lumbosacral Orthosis on Postural Stability in Patients with Low Back Pain: A Preliminary Study.The archives of bone and joint surgery · 2019Article
- A Preliminary Study of the Objective Measurement of Compliance Rates for Semirigid Lumbar-Support Use in Patients with Chronic Nonspecific Low Back Pain: How Important Is the Compliance Rate?Asian spine journal · 2017Article
- A RCT comparing lumbosacral orthosis to routine physical therapy on postural stability in patients with chronic low back pain.Medical journal of the Islamic Republic of IranArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
STUDY
designSingle blinded, randomized clinical trial for the evaluation of lumbosacral orthoses (LSOs) in the management of lower back pain (LBP).
objectiveTo evaluate the effects of two types of LSOs on self-rated disability in patients with LBP. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: LSOs are commonly used for the management of LBP, but their effectiveness may vary because of design. An inextensible LSO (iLSO) reduces trunk motion and increases trunk stiffness, whereas an extensible LSO (eLSO) does not.
methodsA total of 98 participants with LBP were randomized to 3 groups: (1) standard care (SC) group, which included medication and physical therapy (n = 29), (2) SC with eLSO (eLSO group) (n = 32), and (3) SC with iLSO (iLSO group) (n = 37). Outcome measures were evaluated before and after 2 weeks of treatment: modified Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Patient Specific Activity Scale, pain ratings, and Fear Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire.
resultsThere were no statistically significant differences between groups at baseline. Compared with the SC alone, iLSO group showed greater improvement on the ODI scores (P = 0.01) but not the eLSO group. The ODI scores improved by a mean of 2.4 (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.2-7.1), 8.1 (95% CI, 2.8-13.4), and 14.0 (95% CI, 8.2-19.8) points for SC, eLSO, and iLSO groups, respectively. Individuals wearing the iLSO had 4.7 times higher odds of achieving 50% or greater improvement in the ODI scores than those assigned to SC (95% CI, 1.2-18.5, P = 0.03). Both the eLSO and iLSO groups had a greater improvement in the Patient Specific Activity Scale scores than the SC group (P = .05 and P = 0.01, respectively), but the change did not meet the minimal clinically important difference. Pain ratings improved for all 3 groups, with no statistical difference between them. Finally, no significant differences across groups were found for the Fear Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire.
conclusionAn iLSO led to greater improvement in ODI scores than SC and an eLSO. We surmise that the likely mechanism responsible for this difference in outcome was the added trunk stiffness and motion restriction by the iLSO. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2.
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.