ArticleJournal of pain research2022
Comparison of Swiss versus Standard Acupuncture in Patients with Chronic Low Back Pain. A Study Protocol for a Randomized, Controlled, Single-Blind, Parallel Trial.
Article in Journal of pain research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05232487 (Comparison of Swiss Versus Standard Low Back Acupuncture in Patients With Chronic Low Back Pain. A Randomized, Controlled, Single-blind, Monocentric Clinical Study), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
Comparison of Swiss Versus Standard Low Back Acupuncture in Patients With Chronic Low Back Pain. A Randomized, Controlled, Single-blind, Monocentric Clinical Study
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Chronic low back pain (CLBP) cannot sufficiently be treated by pharmacological therapy and generates substantial health-care costs worldwide. Acupuncture, a cost-effective, safe and non-pharmacological therapy, has shown promising results in relieving acute low back pain; however, the optimal acupuncture therapy for CLBP remains controversial. This study will compare two acupuncture methods for pain relief in CLBP. Methods and Analysis: This randomized, controlled, single-blind, parallel trial will be conducted in patients with clinically diagnosed CLBP with a disease duration ≥3 months and an average pain intensity of ≥4 points on an 11-point Pain Intensity Numerical Rating Scale (pain-NRS) on the previous 7 days. Patients will be randomized to 9-week acupuncture therapy using Jiu Gong Points (termed Swiss low back acupuncture, SLBA) or standard acupuncture (SA) therapy (weeks 1-6: two sessions/week, weeks 7-9: one session/week, 15 sessions/patient in total). Measurements will be conducted before the first session (T1), at the end of the 9-week therapy (T2) and after 3- and 6-month follow-up (T3 and T4). The primary hypothesis is that 9 weeks of SLBA will be superior in reducing the pain severity assessed by the pain-NRS compared to SA therapy for CLBP. Secondary outcomes will be derived from the Short-Form 36, Oswestry Disability Index, Multidimensional Pain Inventory questionnaire, Symptom Checklist-90 - Revised questionnaire and a daily pain diary. Assuming a minimal clinically important difference in the pain-NRS of 0.39 and an effect size of ≥0.6 between SLBA and SA, 80% power, 0.05 alpha level and 20% dropouts, a total of 55 patients/arm will be required. The primary outcome will be analyzed in the intention-to-treat population using chained linear regression models. Patients, outcome assessors and data analysts will be blinded to the treatment arm. Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT05232487.
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.