Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33607979›Full record

Trial reportBMC musculoskeletal disorders2021

A randomized controlled trial investigating effects of an individualized pedometer driven walking program on chronic low back pain.

Angelica E Lang, Paul A Hendrick, Lynne Clay, Prosanta Mondal, Catherine M Trask, Brenna Bath, Erika D Penz, Samuel A Stewart, G David Baxter, Deidre A Hurley and 2 more

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02284958 (A Single-centre, Randomized Controlled Trial Investigating Clinical Utility and Cost-effectiveness of an Individualized Pedometer Driven Walking Programme for People With Chronic Low Back Pain), which is not on this map. Cited by 9 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 3 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.

NCT02284958 nacompletednot on this map

A Single-centre, Randomized Controlled Trial Investigating Clinical Utility and Cost-effectiveness of an Individualized Pedometer Driven Walking Programme for People With Chronic Low Back Pain

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of SaskatchewanRan2015 to 2017Enrolled174ConditionsLow Back PainArmsStandard, Walking
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Assessing Walking Programs in Fibromyalgia: A Concordance Study between Measures.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  9. Review
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

12 authors at 6 institutions in 5 countries.

Angelica E LangCollege of Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Canada.
Paul A HendrickSchool of Health Sciences, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Lynne ClaySchool of Physiotherapy, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand.
Prosanta MondalCollege of Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Canada.
Catherine M TraskKTH Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden.
Brenna BathCollege of Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Canada.
Erika D PenzCollege of Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Canada.
Samuel A StewartFaculty of Medicine, Dalhousie University, Halifax Regional Municipality, Nova Scotia, Canada.
G David BaxterSchool of Physiotherapy, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand.
Deidre A HurleySchool of Public Health, Physiotherapy and Sports Science, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.
Suzanne M McDonoughRCSI University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Dublin, Ireland.
Stephan MilosavljevicCollege of Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Canada. stephan.milosavljevic@usask.ca.
University of Saskatchewan · CAUniversity of Otago · NZDalhousie University · CAKTH Royal Institute of Technology · SEUniversity College Dublin · IEUniversity of Nottingham · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWalking is an easily prescribed physical activity for people with low back pain (LBP). However, the evidence for its effectiveness to improve pain and disability levels for people with chronic low back pain (CLBP) within a community setting has not been evaluated. This study evaluates the effectiveness of a clinician guided, pedometer-driven, walking intervention for increasing physical activity and improving clinical outcomes compared to education and advice.

methodsRandomized controlled trial recruiting N = 174 adults with CLBP. Participants were randomly allocated into either a standardized care group (SG) or pedometer based walking group (WG) using minimization allocation with a 2:1 ratio to the WG. Prior to randomization all participants were given a standard package of education and advice regarding self-management and the benefits of staying active. Following randomization the WG undertook a physiotherapist guided pedometer-driven walking program for 12 weeks. This was individually tailored by weekly negotiation of daily step targets. Main outcome was the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) recorded at baseline, 12 weeks, 6 and 12 months. Other outcomes included, numeric pain rating, International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ), Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire (FABQ), Back Beliefs questionnaire (BBQ), Physical Activity Self-efficacy Scale, and EQ-5D-5L quality of life estimate.

resultsN = 138 (79%) participants completed all outcome measures at 12 weeks reducing to N = 96 (55%) at 12 months. Both observed and intention to treat analysis did not show any statistically significant difference in ODI change score between the WG and the SG at all post-intervention time points. There were also no significant between group differences for change scores in all secondary outcome measures. Post hoc sensitivity analyses revealed moderately disabled participants (baseline ODI ≥ 21.0) demonstrated a greater reduction in mean ODI scores at 12 months in the WG compared to SG, while WG participants with a daily baseline step count < 7500 steps demonstrated a greater reduction in mean ODI scores at 12 weeks.

conclusionsOverall, we found no significant difference in change of levels of (ODI) disability between the SG and WG following the walking intervention. However, ODI responses to a walking program for those with moderate levels of baseline disability and those with low baseline step count offer a potential future focus for continued research into the benefit of walking as a management strategy for chronic LBP.

trial registrationUnited States National Institutes of Health Clinical Trails registry (http://ClinicalTrials.gov/) No. NCT02284958 (27/10/2014).

Indexed as

Low Back PainActigraphyAdultHumansQuality of LifeSurveys and QuestionnairesWalkingChronic low back painInterventionPhysical therapyWalking

Identifiers

PMID33607979
PMCPMC7896363
OpenAlexW3130169034

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.