Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29174459›Full record

ArticleThe spine journal : official journal of the North American Spine Society2018

Prognosis of sciatica and back-related leg pain in primary care: the ATLAS cohort.

Kika Konstantinou, Kate M Dunn, Reuben Ogollah, Martyn Lewis, Danielle van der Windt, Elaine M Hay, ATLAS Study Team

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The spine journal : official journal of the North American Spine Society, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
5.5field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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.

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

39 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 93 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Are combined conservative interventions effective in reducing pain, disability and/or global rating of pain in people with sciatica with known neuropathic pain mechanisms?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 · 2024
    Pooled it
  3. Guideline
  4. Prognostic factors associated with outcome following an epidural steroid injection for disc-related sciatica: a systematic review and narrative synthesis.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 · 2023
    Pooled it
  5. How effective are physiotherapy interventions in treating people with sciatica? A systematic review and meta-analysis.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 · 2023
    Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Predictors of outcome following an epidural steroid injection for disc-related sciatica: a Delphi consensus study.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 · 2024
    Article
  19. Prevalence of weakness and factors mediating discrepancy between reported and observed leg weakness in people with sciatica.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 · 2024
    Article
  20. 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Kika KonstantinouArthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Research Institute for Primary Care & Health Sciences, Keele University, Staffordshire ST5 5BG, United Kingdom. Electronic address: k.konstantinou@keele.ac.uk.
Kate M DunnArthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Research Institute for Primary Care & Health Sciences, Keele University, Staffordshire ST5 5BG, United Kingdom.
Reuben OgollahArthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Research Institute for Primary Care & Health Sciences, Keele University, Staffordshire ST5 5BG, United Kingdom.
Martyn LewisArthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Research Institute for Primary Care & Health Sciences, Keele University, Staffordshire ST5 5BG, United Kingdom.
Danielle van der WindtArthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Research Institute for Primary Care & Health Sciences, Keele University, Staffordshire ST5 5BG, United Kingdom.
Elaine M HayArthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Research Institute for Primary Care & Health Sciences, Keele University, Staffordshire ST5 5BG, United Kingdom.
ATLAS Study TeamArthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Research Institute for Primary Care & Health Sciences, Keele University, Staffordshire ST5 5BG, United Kingdom.
Arthritis UK · GB

Funding

Department of Health CAT CL09-18Department of Health RP-PG-0707-10131Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

background contextEvidence is lacking on the prognosis and prognostic factors of back-related leg pain and sciatica in patients seeing their primary care physicians. This evidence could guide timely appropriate treatment and referral decisions. PURPOSE: The present study aims to describe the prognosis and prognostic factors in primary care patients with low back-related leg pain and sciatica. STUDY

designThis is a prospective cohort study. PATIENT SAMPLE: The present study included adults visiting their family doctor with back-related leg pain in the United Kingdom. OUTCOME MEASURES: Information about pain, function, psychological, and clinical variables, was collected. Good outcome was defined as 30% or more reduction in disability (Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire).

methodsParticipants completed the questionnaires, underwent clinical assessments, received a magnetic resonance imaging scan, and were followed-up 12 months later. Mixed-effects logistic regression evaluated the prognostic value of six a priori defined variable sets (leg pain duration, pain intensity, neuropathic pain, psychological factors, clinical examination, and imaging variables). A combined model, including variables from all models, examined independent effects. The National Institute for Health Research funded the study. There are no conflicts of interest.

resultsA total of 609 patients were included. At 12 months, 55% of patients improved in both the total sample and the sciatica group. For the whole cohort, longer leg pain duration (odds ratio [OR] 0.41; confidence interval [CI] 0.19-0.90), higher identity score (OR 0.70; CI 0.53-0.93), and patient's belief that the problem will last a long time (OR 0.27; CI 0.13-0.57) were the strongest independent prognostic factors negatively associated with improvement. These last two factors were similarly negatively associated with improvement in the sciatica subgroup.

conclusionsThe present study provides new evidence on the prognosis and prognostic factors of back-related leg pain and sciatica in primary care. Just over half of patients improved at 12 months. Patient's belief of recovery timescale and number of other symptoms attributed to the pain are independent prognostic factors. These factors can be used to inform and direct decisions about timing and intensity of available therapeutic options.

Indexed as

AdultAttitude to HealthCohort StudiesDisability EvaluationFemaleHumansLow Back PainMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMiddle AgedPain MeasurementPrimary Health CarePrognosisProspective StudiesSciaticaSurveys and QuestionnairesLeg painLow back painPrimary carePrognosisPrognostic factorsSciatica

Identifiers

PMID29174459
PMCPMC5984249
OpenAlexW2768363303

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.