Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28186932›Full record

Trial reportBMJ open2016

Descriptive analysis of a 1:1 physiotherapy outpatient intervention post primary lumbar discectomy: one arm of a small-scale parallel randomised controlled trial across two UK sites.

A Rushton, A Calcutt, N Heneghan, A Heap, L White, M Calvert, P Goodwin

Abstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMJ open, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

A RushtonSchool of Sport, Exercise and Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
A CalcuttDepartment of Physiotherapy, Aneurin Bevan University Health Board, Ebbw Vale, UK.
N HeneghanSchool of Sport, Exercise and Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
A HeapUniversity Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Birmingham, UK.
L WhiteUniversity Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Birmingham, UK.
M CalvertInstitute of Applied Health Research, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-1856-837X
P GoodwinHealth Professions Department (Physiotherapy), Manchester, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThere is a lack of high-quality evidence for physiotherapy post lumbar discectomy. Substantial heterogeneity in treatment effects may be explained by variation in quality, administration and components of interventions. An optimised physiotherapy intervention may reduce heterogeneity and improve patient benefit. The objective was to describe, analyse and evaluate an optimised 1:1 physiotherapy outpatient intervention for patients following primary lumbar discectomy, to provide preliminary insights.

designA descriptive analysis of the intervention embedded within an external pilot and feasibility trial.

settingTwo UK spinal centres.

participantsParticipants aged ≥18; post primary, single level, lumbar discectomy were recruited.

interventionThe intervention encompassed education, advice, mobility and core stability exercises, progressive exercise, and encouragement of early return to work/activity. Patients received ≤8 sessions for ≤8 weeks, starting 4 weeks post surgery (baseline). OUTCOMES: Blinded outcome assessment at baseline and 12 weeks (post intervention) included the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire. STarT Back data were collected at baseline. Statistical analyses summarised participant characteristics and preplanned descriptive analyses. Thematic analysis grouped related data.

findingsTwenty-two of 29 allocated participants received the intervention. STarT Back categorised n=16 (55%) participants 'not at low risk'. Physiotherapists identified reasons for caution for 8 (36%) participants, commonly risk of overdoing activity (n=4, 18%). There was no relationship between STarT Back and physiotherapists' evaluation of caution. Physiotherapists identified 154 problems (mean (SD) 5.36 (2.63)). Those 'not at low risk', and/or requiring caution presented with more problems, and required more sessions (mean (SD) 3.14 (1.16)).

conclusionsPatients present differently and therefore require tailored interventions. These differences may be identified using clinical reasoning and outcome data. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN33808269; post results.

Indexed as

OutpatientsAdultDisability EvaluationDiskectomyExercise TherapyFemaleHumansLow Back PainLumbar VertebraeMaleMiddle AgedPain MeasurementPhysical TherapistsQualitative ResearchTreatment OutcomeUnited Kingdomclinical reasoningLumbar discectomyPhysiotherapyREHABILITATION MEDICINE

Identifiers

PMID28186932
PMCPMC5128994

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.