ArticleEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2020
Efficacy of an integrated, active rehabilitation protocol in patients ≥ 65 years of age with chronic mechanical low back pain.
Article in 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, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis retrospective study aimed to determine the efficacy of an integrated active, rehabilitation protocol in patients ≥ 65 years of age with chronic mechanical low back pain and compare the results in similar patients in 50-64 years age group.
methodsPre- and post-treatment mean numerical pain rating scale (NPRS) score, mean Oswestry disability index (ODI) score, treatment outcome category and minimal clinically important difference (MCID) thresholds achieved for NPRS and ODI scores post-treatment were compared among 697 patients in the 50-64 years and 495 patients in the ≥ 65 years age groups.
resultsAt a mean treatment duration of 57 days (range, 30-90 days), both mean NPRS score (p < 0.0001) and mean ODI score (p < 0.0001) were significantly higher in the ≥ 65 years age group when compared to the 50-64 years age group. However, post-treatment outcome categories (p = 0.17) and percentage of patients who achieved MCID thresholds for NPRS score (p = 0.13) and ODI score (p = 0.18) were not significantly different between the two groups. There was a significant correlation between post-treatment NPRS score and patient age and pre-treatment NPRS score and between post-treatment ODI score and incidence of osteoporosis and pre-treatment ODI score.
conclusionAlthough mean NPRS and ODI scores achieved were significantly better in patients of 50-64 years of age, our integrated active, rehabilitation protocol helped achieve significant improvement in NPRS score, MCID thresholds for NPRS and ODI scores and treatment outcomes in patients ≥ 65 years of age, similar to patients in the 50-64 years of age group, at the end of 3 months of treatment. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.
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.