Trial reportWorld journal of methodology2024
Botulinum toxin type A for treating chronic low back pain: A double blinded randomized control study.
Trial report in World journal of methodology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Efficacy of botulinum toxin type a for treating chronic low back pain: a systematic review and metanalysis.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLow back pain (LBP) is a prevalent issue that orthopedic surgeons frequently address in the outpatient setting. LBP can arise from various causes, with stiffness in the paraspinal muscles being a notable contributor. The administration of Botulinum toxin type A (BoNT-A) has been found to alleviate back pain by relaxing these stiff muscles. While BoNT-A is approved for use in numerous conditions, a limited number of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) validate its efficacy specifically for treating LBP.
aimTo study the safety and the efficacy of BoNT-A in minimizing pain and improving functional outcomes in patients of chronic LBP (CLBP).
methodsIn this RCT, adults aged 18-60 years with mechanical LBP persisting for at least six months were enrolled. Participants were allocated to either the Drug group, receiving 200 Ipsen Units (2 mL) of BoNT-A, or the Control group, which received a 2 mL placebo. Over a 2-month follow-up period, both groups were assessed using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for pain intensity and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) for disability at the start and conclusion of the study. A decrease in pain by 50% was deemed clinically significant.
resultsThe study followed 40 patients for two months, with 20 in each group. A clinically significant reduction in pain was observed in 36 participants. There was a statistically significant decrease in both VAS and ODI scores in the groups at the end of two months. Nonetheless, when comparing the mean score changes, only the reduction in ODI scores (15 in the placebo group
conclusionThe study concludes that BoNT-A does not offer a short-term advantage over placebo in reducing pain or improving LBP scores in CLBP patients.
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.