Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30237870›Full record

SynthesisChiropractic & manual therapies2018

Assessment of variability in traction interventions for patients with low back pain: a systematic review.

Muhammad Alrwaily, Mohammed Almutiri, Michael Schneider

Registry-linked trialAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Chiropractic & manual therapies, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06812338 (Effect of Different Positions During Traction on Pain, Function, and Range of Motion in Adults with Non-specific Low Back Pain), which is not on this map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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.

NCT06812338 nanot yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Effect of Different Positions During Traction on Pain, Function, and Range of Motion in Adults with Non-specific Low Back Pain

TypeinterventionalSponsorPrince Sattam Bin Abdulaziz UniversityRan2025 to 2025Enrolled30ConditionsNon-specific Low Back Pain, Lumbar TractionArmsmechanical traction
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Use of a Spinal Traction Device during Work Shift in Assembly Line Workers.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Article
  12. Review
  13. 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

3 authors.

Muhammad Alrwaily1Division of Physical Therapy, School of Medicine, West Virginia University, 1 Medical Center Drive, P.O. Box 9226 - Room 8304, Morgantown, WV 26506 USA.ORCID 0000-0001-9406-6788
Mohammed Almutiri3Department of Physical Therapy, School of Applied Medical Sciences, Najran University, King Abdulaziz Rd, PO Box 1988, Najran, 61441 Saudi Arabia.
Michael Schneider4Department of Physical Therapy, School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Pittsburgh, Bridgeside Point 1, 100 Technology Drive, Suite 210, Pittsburgh, PA 15219 USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Previous systematic reviews have concluded that lumbar traction is not effective for patients with low back pain (LBP), yet many clinicians continue to assert its clinical effectiveness. Objective: To systematically identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of traction and explore the variability of traction interventions used in each RCT. Method: A literature search started in September 2016 to retrieve systematic reviews and individual RCTs of lumbar traction. The term "lumbar traction" and other key words were used in the following databases: Cochrane Registry, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL. The retrieved systematic reviews were used to extract individual RCTs. The most current systematic review included RCTs from inception until August 2012. We performed an additional literature search to update this systematic review with newer RCTs published between September 2012 and December 2016. All of the identified RCTs were combined and summarized into a single evidence table. Results: We identified a total of 37 traction RCTs that varied greatly in their method of traction intervention. The RCTs included several types of traction: mechanical (57%), auto-traction (16%), manual (10.8%), gravitational (8.1%) and aquatic (5.4%). There was also great variability in the types of traction force, rhythm, session duration and treatment frequency used in the RCTs. Patient characteristics were a mixture of acute, subacute and chronic LBP; with or without sciatica. Conclusion: There is wide variability in the type of traction, traction parameters and patient characteristics found among the RCTs of lumbar traction. The variability may call into question the conclusion that lumbar traction has little no or value on clinical outcomes. Also, this variability emphasizes the need for targeted delivery methods of traction that match appropriate dosages with specific subgroups of patients with LBP.

Indexed as

Databases, FactualHumansLow Back PainRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTractionTreatment OutcomeLow back painSciaticaSystematic reviewTraction

Identifiers

PMID30237870
PMCPMC6139896

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.