Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32195952›Full record

Trial reportMedicine2020

Clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness of massage chair therapy versus basic physiotherapy in lower back pain patients: A randomized controlled trial.

Seung-Kook Kim, Aran Min, Chuljin Jeon, Taeyun Kim, Soohyun Cho, Su-Chan Lee, Choon-Key Lee

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 34 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Clinical studies on the electric automatic massage therapy for recovery of acute sports fatigue.Technology and health care : official journal of the European Society for Engineering and Medicine · 2023
    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 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Seung-Kook KimHimchan UHS Spine and Joint Centre, University Hospital Sharjah, Sharjah, United Arab Emirates.
Aran MinMedical R&D Center, Bodyfriend, Seoul.
Chuljin JeonMedical R&D Center, Bodyfriend, Seoul.
Taeyun KimMedical R&D Center, Bodyfriend, Seoul.
Soohyun ChoMedical R&D Center, Bodyfriend, Seoul.
Su-Chan LeeJoint and Arthritis Research, Orthopedic Surgery, Himchan Hospital, Seoul.
Choon-Key LeeJoint and Arthritis Research, Orthopedic Surgery, Himchan Hospital, Seoul.
Himchan Hospital · KRYonsei University · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionLow back pain is a chronic recurrent symptom, which can lower the patient's quality of life. With technological development of automated home massage systems, now offers a promising alternative to physiotherapy. However, thus far, the effectiveness of such methods has not been evaluated. We aimed to compare the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of a massage chair with those of conventional physiotherapy for the treatment.

methodsThis was a randomized controlled trial with a two-group parallel design. Following randomization and allocation, 56 participants were enrolled to receive either physiotherapy (n = 25) or mechanical massage using the massage chair (n = 31). Pain severity was measured using a visual analog scale (VAS) and satisfaction assessed with the McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ). Quality of life modification was analyzed using the Functional Rating Index (FRI). Cost-effectiveness was analyzed by comparing the sum of physiotherapy fees and monthly rental fees for chair massage.

resultsPhysiotherapy and massage chair were both effective for pain control as assessed with the VAS (P < .001), satisfaction as assessed by MPQ (P < .001) and life quality improvement as assessed by FRI (P < .001) in both groups. Both VAS and FRI scores were significantly higher for physiotherapy than for massage chair (P = .03 and P = .03, respectively). There was no significant difference in MPQ between the two groups. Massage chair therapy was more cost-effective than physiotherapy, at only 60.17% of the physiotherapy cost (P < .001).

conclusionsThe home massage chair system was cost-effective, but pain control and disability improved more with physiotherapy. However, our results showed that the massage chair is a promising treatment for pain control and quality of life modification, but efficacy is still superior in physiotherapy and the chair is not a replacement for physiotherapy.

trial registrationClinical Research Information Service, KCT0003157. Retrospectively registered August 2, 2018.

Indexed as

AdultCost-Benefit AnalysisFemaleHumansLow Back PainMaleMassageMiddle AgedPain ManagementPain MeasurementPatient SatisfactionPhysical Therapy ModalitiesProspective StudiesQuality of LifeVisual Analog Scale

Identifiers

PMID32195952
PMCPMC7220115
OpenAlexW3012168510

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.