SynthesisCanadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien2021
PEER systematic review of randomized controlled trials: Management of chronic low back pain in primary care.
Synthesis in Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
24 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 58 citations in OpenAlex.
- Medical Cannabis and Its Efficacy/Effectiveness for the Treatment of Low-Back Pain: a Systematic Review.Current pain and headache reports · 2023Pooled it
- Systematic review of guideline-recommended medications prescribed for treatment of low back pain.Chiropractic & manual therapies · 2022Pooled it
- PEER systematic review of randomized controlled trials: Management of chronic neuropathic pain in primary care.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2021Pooled it
- Effectiveness of Hybrid Form Impulse Therapy (HFIT) Compared to Traditional Transcutaneous Electronic Nerve Stimulation (TENS) in Patients with Chronic Low Back and Knee Pain: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of pain research · 2024Trial
- Misbeliefs about non-specific low back pain and attitudes towards treatment by primary care providers in Spain: a qualitative study.BMC primary care · 2022Trial
- High-Frequency Impulse Therapy for Treatment of Chronic Back Pain: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Pilot Study.Journal of pain research · 2021Trial
- Integrative Treatment Strategies for Chronic Back Pain: A Literature Review with Clinical Recommendations.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Review
- A new role for spinal manual therapy and for chiropractic? Part II: strengths and opportunities.Chiropractic & manual therapies · 2024Article
- Acceptability, values, and preferences of older people for chronic low back pain management; a qualitative evidence synthesis.BMC geriatrics · 2024Review
- What a pain in the … back: a review of current treatment options with a focus on naproxen sodium.Journal of pharmacy & pharmaceutical sciences : a publication of the Canadian Society for Pharmaceutical Sciences, Societe canadienne des sciences pharmaceutiques · 2024Review
- Interventional pain blocks in Ontario: a population-based cross-sectional study on 2019 procedural volumes, clustering, and physician billings.Canadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie · 2023Article
- Acupuncture as an alternative or in addition to conventional treatment for chronic non-specific low back pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Integrative medicine research · 2023Review
- Digital Therapeutics (DTx) Expand Multimodal Treatment Options for Chronic Low Back Pain: The Nexus of Precision Medicine, Patient Education, and Public Health.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- #Scoliosis: an analysis of patient perception of scoliosis on TikTok.Proceedings (Baylor University. Medical Center) · 2023Article
- What do people living with chronic pain want from a pain forecast? A research prioritization study.PloS one · 2023Article
- Using TENS for Pain Control: Update on the State of the Evidence.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2022Review
- PEER simplified chronic pain guideline: Management of chronic low back, osteoarthritic, and neuropathic pain in primary care.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2022Article
- Developing nociceptor-selective treatments for acute and chronic pain.Science translational medicine · 2021Article
- Self-Treatment of Chronic Low Back Pain Based on a Rapid and Objective Sacroiliac Asymmetry Test: A Pilot Study.Cureus · 2021Article
- Attitudes towards chiropractic: a repeated cross-sectional survey of Canadian family physicians.BMC family practice · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo determine the proportion of chronic low back pain patients who achieve a clinically meaningful response from different pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatments. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and gray literature search. STUDY SELECTION: Published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that reported a responder analysis of adults with chronic low back pain treated with any of the following 15 interventions: oral or topical nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), exercise, acupuncture, spinal manipulation therapy, corticosteroid injections, acetaminophen, oral opioids, anticonvulsants, tricyclic antidepressants, serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, cannabinoids, oral muscle relaxants, or topical rubefacients. SYNTHESIS: A total of 63 RCTs were included. There was moderate certainty that exercise (risk ratio [RR] of 1.71; 95% CI 1.37 to 2.15; number needed to treat [NNT] of 7), oral NSAIDs (RR = 1.44; 95% CI 1.17 to 1.78; NNT = 6), and SNRIs (duloxetine; RR = 1.25; 95% CI 1.13 to 1.38; NNT = 10) provide clinically meaningful benefits to patients with chronic low back pain. Exercise was the only intervention with sustained benefit (up to 48 weeks). There was low certainty that spinal manipulation therapy and topical rubefacients benefit patients. The benefit of acupuncture disappeared in higher-quality, longer (> 4 weeks) trials. Very low-quality evidence demonstrated that corticosteroid injections are ineffective. Patients treated with opioids had a greater likelihood of discontinuing treatment owing to an adverse event (number needed to harm of 5) than continuing treatment to derive any clinically meaningful benefit (NNT = 16), while those treated with SNRIs (duloxetine) had a similar likelihood of continuing treatment to attain benefit (NNT = 10) as those discontinuing the medication owing to an adverse event (number need to harm of 11). One trial each of anticonvulsants and topical NSAIDs found similar benefit to that of placebo. No RCTs of acetaminophen, cannabinoids, muscle relaxants, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, or tricyclic antidepressants met the inclusion criteria.
conclusionExercise, oral NSAIDs, and SNRIs (duloxetine) provide a clinically meaningful reduction in pain, with exercise being the only intervention that demonstrated sustained benefit after the intervention ended. Future high-quality trials that report responder analyses are required to provide a better understanding of the benefits and harms of interventions for patients with chronic low back pain.
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.