Trial reportPloS one2015
A Randomized, Single-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study on the Efficacy of the Arthrokinematic Approach-Hakata Method in Patients with Chronic Nonspecific Low Back Pain.
Trial report in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 4 of them syntheses 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Impact of education in patients undergoing physiotherapy for lower back pain: a level I systematic review and meta-analysis.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2025Pooled it
- Manual Therapy Effect in Placebo-Controlled Trials: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Pooled it
- Sham treatment effects in manual therapy trials on back pain patients: a systematic review and pairwise meta-analysis.BMJ open · 2021Pooled it
- Meta-Analysis of Integrated Therapeutic Methods in Noninvasive Lower Back Pain Therapy (LBP): The Role of Interdisciplinary Functional Diagnostics.Pain research & management · 2020Pooled it
- Prognostic Factors in Patients Undergoing Physiotherapy for Chronic Low Back Pain: A Level I Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Effectiveness of manual therapy for patients with low back pain from the perspective of physical and psychosocial factors.Journal of physical therapy science · 2024Article
- Physiotherapeutic and non-conventional approaches in patients with chronic low-back pain: a level I Bayesian network meta-analysis.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Assessment of health-related quality of life and patient's knowledge in chronic non-specific low back pain.BMC public health · 2021Article
- Biomechanical analysis of INFINITY rehabilitation method for treatment of low back pain.Journal of physical therapy science · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
STUDY
designCized, single-blind, controlled trial.
objectiveTo investigate the efficacy of the Arthrokinematic approach (AKA)-Hakata (H) method for chronic low back pain. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The AKA-H method is used to manually treat abnormalities of intra-articular movement.
methodsOne hundred eighty-six patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain randomly received either the AKA-H method (AKA-H group) or the sham technique (S group) monthly for 6 months. Data were collected at baseline and once a month. Outcome measures were pain intensity (visual analogue scale [VAS]) and quality of life (the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire [RDQ] and Short Form SF-36 questionnaire [SF-36]).
resultsAt baseline, the VAS, RDQ, and SF-36 scores showed similar levels between the groups. After 6 months, the AKA-H group had more improvement in the VAS (42.8% improvement) and RDQ score (31.1% improvement) than the sham group (VAS: 10.4% improvement; RDQ: 9.8% improvement; both, P < 0.001). The respective scores for the SF-36 subscales (physical functioning, role physical, bodily pain, social functioning, general health perception, role emotional, and mental health) were also significantly more improved in the AKA-H group than in the sham group (all, P < 0.001). The scores for the physical, psychological, and social aspects of the SF-36 subscales showed similar improvement in the AKA-H group.
conclusionThe AKA-H method can be effective in managing chronic low back pain.
trial registrationUMIN Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN-CTR) UMIN000006250.
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.