Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31720722›Full record

Trial reportOsteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA2020

Physiotherapy rehabilitation for osteoporotic vertebral fracture-a randomised controlled trial and economic evaluation (PROVE trial).

K L Barker, M Newman, N Stallard, J Leal, C M Lowe, M K Javaid, A Noufaily, T Hughes, D Smith, V Gandhi and 3 more

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 37 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Conservative treatments for non-surgically managed osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures: a network meta-analysis of long-term pain and quality of life.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Exercise rehabilitation with tailored support for exercise adherence for people with vertebral fragility fractures is more effective than standard rehabilitation: the OPTIN randomised controlled trial.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2025
    Trial
  7. Effectiveness and safety of physical exercise and health education for the management of osteoporotic vertebral fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2026
    Review
  8. Review
  9. Exercise improves quality of life, mental health and pain in people living with osteoporosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2026
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  16. Review
  17. International consensus on the non-pharmacological and non-surgical management of osteoporotic vertebral fractures.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2023
    Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  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

13 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

K L BarkerNuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences (NDORMS), Botnar Research Centre, University of Oxford, Oxford, OX3 7LD, UK. karen.barker@ouh.nhs.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9363-0383
M NewmanPhysiotherapy Research Unit, Physiotherapy Department, Nuffield Orthopaedic Centre, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Windmill Road, Oxford, OX3 7LD, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7228-2022
N StallardDivision of Health Sciences, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7781-1512
J LealHealth Economics Research Centre, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7870-6730
C M LowePhysiotherapy Research Unit, Physiotherapy Department, Nuffield Orthopaedic Centre, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Windmill Road, Oxford, OX3 7LD, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1924-2267
M K JavaidNuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences (NDORMS), Botnar Research Centre, University of Oxford, Oxford, OX3 7LD, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7985-0048
A NoufailyDivision of Health Sciences, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8522-6591
T HughesPhysiotherapy Research Unit, Physiotherapy Department, Nuffield Orthopaedic Centre, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Windmill Road, Oxford, OX3 7LD, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9211-6905
D SmithNuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences (NDORMS), Botnar Research Centre, University of Oxford, Oxford, OX3 7LD, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9177-4201
V GandhiNuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences (NDORMS), Botnar Research Centre, University of Oxford, Oxford, OX3 7LD, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5866-1579
C CooperNuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences (NDORMS), Botnar Research Centre, University of Oxford, Oxford, OX3 7LD, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3510-0709
S E LambNuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences (NDORMS), Botnar Research Centre, University of Oxford, Oxford, OX3 7LD, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4349-7195
PROVE trial group
Nuffield Orthopaedic Centre · GBUniversity of Warwick · GB

Funding

Department of Health 10/99/01Health Technology Assessment Programme 10.99.01Medical Research Council G0400491Medical Research Council MC_U147585819Medical Research Council MC_U147585824Medical Research Council MC_U147585827Medical Research Council MC_UP_A620_1014Medical Research Council MC_UU_12011/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The trial compared three physiotherapy approaches: manual or exercise therapy compared with a single session of physiotherapy education (SSPT) for people with osteoporotic vertebral fracture(s). At 1 year, there were no statistically significant differences between the groups meaning there is inadequate evidence to support manual or exercise therapy.

introductionTo evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of different physiotherapy approaches for people with osteoporotic vertebral fracture(s) (OVF).

methods>Prospective, multicentre, adaptive, three-arm randomised controlled trial. Six hundred fifteen adults with back pain, osteoporosis, and at least 1 OVF participated.

interventions7 individual physiotherapy sessions over 12 weeks focused on either manual therapy or home exercise compared with a single session of physiotherapy education (SSPT). The co-primary outcomes were quality of life and back muscle endurance measured by the QUALEFFO-41 and timed loaded standing (TLS) test at 12 months.

resultsAt 12 months, there were no statistically significant differences between groups. Mean QUALEFFO-41: - 1.3 (exercise), - 0.15 (manual), and - 1.2 (SSPT), a mean difference of - 0.2 (95% CI, - 3.2 to 1.6) for exercise and 1.3 (95% CI, - 1.8 to 2.9) for manual therapy. Mean TLS: 9.8 s (exercise), 13.6 s (manual), and 4.2 s (SSPT), a mean increase of 5.8 s (95% CI, - 4.8 to 20.5) for exercise and 9.7 s (95% CI, 0.1 to 24.9) for manual therapy. Exercise provided more quality-adjusted life years than SSPT but was more expensive. At 4 months, significant changes above SSPT occurred in endurance and balance in manual therapy, and in endurance for those ≤ 70 years, in balance, mobility, and walking in exercise.

conclusionsAdherence was problematic. Benefits at 4 months did not persist and at 12 months, we found no significant differences between treatments. There is inadequate evidence a short physiotherapy intervention of either manual therapy or home exercise provides long-term benefits, but arguably short-term benefits are valuable.

trial registrationISRCTN 49117867.

Indexed as

Exercise TherapyPhysical Therapy ModalitiesSpinal FracturesAgedAged, 80 and overCost-Benefit AnalysisFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedOsteoporosisProspective StudiesQuality of LifeExercise therapyManual therapyOsteoporosisPhysical therapyRehabilitationSpinal fracture

Identifiers

PMID31720722
OpenAlexW2967664055

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.