Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36104745›Full record

Trial reportBMC pharmacology & toxicology2022

The effectiveness of pregabalin with or without agomelatine in the treatment of chronic low back pain: a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial.

Seyed Mani Mahdavi, Behnam Shariati, Mohammadreza Shalbafan, Vahid Rashedi, Masoomeh Yarahmadi, Alireza Ghaznavi, Shayan Amiri

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC pharmacology & toxicology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 24% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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 1 country.

Seyed Mani MahdaviBone and Joint Reconstruction Research Center, Department of Orthopedics, School of Medicine, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Behnam ShariatiMental Health Research Center, Department of Psychiatry, School of Medicine, Psychosocial Health Research Institute (PHRI), Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Mohammadreza ShalbafanMental Health Research Center, Department of Psychiatry, School of Medicine, Psychosocial Health Research Institute (PHRI), Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Vahid RashediIranian Research Center on Aging, Department of Aging, University of Social Welfare and Rehabilitation Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Masoomeh YarahmadiSchool of Behavioral Sciences and Mental Health, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Alireza GhaznaviBone and Joint Reconstruction Research Center, Department of Orthopedics, School of Medicine, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Shayan AmiriBone and Joint Reconstruction Research Center, Department of Orthopedics, School of Medicine, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. amiri.shayan23@gmail.com.
Iran University of Medical Sciences · IRUniversity of Social Welfare and Rehabilitation Sciences · IR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough various pharmacological and nonpharmacological treatments are available for the chronic low back pain (CLBP), there is no consensus on the best optimal treatment for this condition. This study aimed to investigate the efficacy of co-administration of pregabalin and agomelatine versus pregabalin with placebo to treat CLBP.

methodsForty-six CLBP patients without the surgical indication referred to the outpatient orthopedic clinic of Rasoul-e-Akram Hospital, Tehran, Iran, were randomly divided into two study groups: Group A [pregabalin (75 mg twice per day) + placebo] and Group B [pregabalin (75 mg twice per day) + agomelatine (25 mg per night)]. Patients were evaluated at weeks 0, 4, and 8. Outcome measures were the Persian versions of the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) interference scale, Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ), The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), 36-Item Short Form Survey (SF-36), and General Health Questionnaire-28 (GHQ-28) were used.

resultsAt weeks 4 and 8 after the intervention, all evaluated measures showed significant improvement in both study groups (P < 0.01). The mean improvement of GHQ-28 was 3.7 ± 1.22 in group A and 13.1 ± 4.71 in group B. This difference was statistically significant (P = 0.003). Other outcomes did not vary substantially between the two research groups. Agomelatine treatment was well tolerated, with no significant adverse effects seen in patients. Liver tests of all patients were routine during the study period. Major adverse effect was not seen in any patient. The prevalence of Minor side effects was not significantly different between two study groups.

conclusionCompared with the pregabalin and placebo, co-administration of pregabalin and agomelatine had no added effect on improving pain scores in CLBP patients. However, the patients' general health was significantly improved after the combined administration of pregabalin and agomelatine.

trial registrationThe study protocol was registered in the Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials before starting the study (NO.IRCT20200620047852N1, Registration date: 23/06/2020).

Indexed as

Low Back PainAcetamidesDouble-Blind MethodHumansIranNaphthalenesPain MeasurementPregabalinTreatment OutcomeAcetamidesagomelatineNaphthalenesPregabalinAgomelatinClinical trialLow back painPregabalin

Identifiers

PMID36104745
PMCPMC9476640
OpenAlexW4295762985

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.