Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34927468›Full record

ArticleGlobal spine journal2022

Coccydynia-The Efficacy of Available Treatment Options: A Systematic Review.

Gustav Ø Andersen, Stefan Milosevic, Mads M Jensen, Mikkel Ø Andersen, Ane Simony, Mikkel M Rasmussen, Leah Carreon

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Global spine journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
4.6field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Medical acupuncture · 2023
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. 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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Gustav Ø AndersenDepartment of Neurosurgery, 11297Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7598-7538
Stefan MilosevicDepartment of Neurosurgery, 11297Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.
Mads M JensenDepartment of Neurosurgery, 11297Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5843-6216
Mikkel Ø AndersenCenter for Spine Surgery & Research, 298597Middelfart Hospital, Østre Hougvej, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8478-8218
Ane SimonyCenter for Spine Surgery & Research, 298597Middelfart Hospital, Østre Hougvej, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1788-1161
Mikkel M RasmussenDepartment of Neurosurgery, 11297Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.
Leah CarreonCenter for Spine Surgery & Research, 298597Middelfart Hospital, Østre Hougvej, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7685-9036
Aarhus University Hospital · DKNorton Healthcare · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

STUDY

designSystematic Review.

objectiveTo evaluate the efficacy of available treatment options for patients with persistent coccydynia through a systematic review.

methodsOriginal peer-reviewed publications on treatment for coccydynia were identified using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines by performing a literature search of relevant databases, from their inception to January 17, 2020, combined with other sources. Data on extracted treatment outcome was pooled based on treatment categories to allow for meta-analysis. All outcomes relevant to the treatment efficacy of coccydynia were extracted. No single measure of outcome was consistently present among the included studies. Numeric Rating Scale, (NRS, 0-10) for pain was used as the primary outcome measure. Studies with treatment outcome on adult patients with chronic primary coccydynia were considered eligible.

resultsA total of 1980 patients across 64 studies were identified: five randomized controlled trials, one experimental study, one quasi-experimental study, 11 prospective observational studies, 45 retrospective studies and unpublished data from the DaneSpine registry. The greatest improvement in pain was achieved by patients who underwent radiofrequency therapy (RFT, mean Visual Analog Scale (VAS) decreased by 5.11 cm). A similar mean improvement was achieved from Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy (ESWT, 5.06), Coccygectomy (4.86) and Injection (4.22). Although improved, the mean change was less for those who received Ganglion block (2.98), Stretching/Manipulation (2.19) and Conservative/Usual Care (1.69).

conclusionThis study highlights the progressive nature of treatment for coccydynia, starting with noninvasive methods before considering coccygectomy. Non-surgical management provides pain relief for many patients. Coccygectomy is by far the most thoroughly investigated treatment option and may be beneficial for refractory cases. Future randomized controlled trials should be conducted with an aim to compare the efficacy of interventional therapies amongst each other and to coccygectomy.

Indexed as

chronic paincoccyxinjectionorthopedic

Identifiers

PMID34927468
PMCPMC9393997
OpenAlexW4200381220

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.