ReviewLife (Basel, Switzerland)2024
The Effectiveness of Ozone Infiltration on Patient-Reported Outcomes in Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Life (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Efficacy of ozone with steroid injection therapy in lumbar disc herniation: meta-analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Multidisciplinary expert consensus on clinical diagnosis and therapies for low back pain.Bone research · 2026Article
- Hope for 17 patients with chronic cluster headache: efficacy evaluation of upper cervical spinal nerve root release surgery (2020-2023).Frontiers in neurology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectiveThe objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the current evidence on the relative efficacy of ozone injections for improving patient-reported outcomes (PROMs).
methodsA literature search was conducted in four databases, and PROMs were analyzed. Odds ratios (ORs), mean differences, and standard mean differences with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. Meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager.
resultsNine studies (total number of participants = 1711) were included. Overall, the ODI (Oswestry Disability Index) showed favorable results for ozone (SMD -0.28, 95% CI -0.51 to -0.06). However, subgroup analysis by follow-up time found no significant differences at 2 weeks or 6 months but significant differences at 1 month. The VAS also favored ozone use overall (SMD -0.12, 95% CI -0.24 -0.01). Subgroup and sensitivity analyses revealed no significant differences between groups. There were also no significant differences in excellent outcomes (OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.67) or poor outcomes (OR 1.25, 95% CI 0.66 to 2.37).
conclusionsOzone therapy has demonstrated limited benefits over the usual care for lower back pain. While a small advantage emerged for function at one month, the results were inconsistent, and no differences were seen in pain or clinical outcomes.
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.