Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39974748›Full record

ArticleArchives of physiotherapy

Comparisons of the effects of psychologically-informed and usual physiotherapy on pain sensitivity in chronic low back pain: an exploratory randomized controlled trial.

Hugo Massé-Alarie, Amélie Desgagnés, Claudia Côté-Picard, Olivier Liberty, Pierre Langevin, Mathieu Piché, Yannick Tousignant-Laflamme

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Archives of physiotherapy. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04979403 (Efficacy of a Psychologically-Informed Physiotherapy Intervention in Patients With Chronic Low Back Pain With a High Level of Psychosocial Factors), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT04979403 nacompletednot on this map

Efficacy of a Psychologically-Informed Physiotherapy Intervention in Patients With Chronic Low Back Pain With a High Level of Psychosocial Factors: a Feasibility and Pilot Randomized Clinical Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorLaval UniversityRan2021 to 2022Enrolled40ConditionsLow Back Pain, RecurrentArmsPhysiotherapy
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Hugo Massé-AlarieCirris, School of Rehabilitation Sciences, Université Laval, Quebec City - Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4472-9656
Amélie DesgagnésCirris, School of Rehabilitation Sciences, Université Laval, Quebec City - Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6291-4866
Claudia Côté-PicardCirris, School of Rehabilitation Sciences, Université Laval, Quebec City - Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1800-1832
Olivier LibertyCirris, School of Rehabilitation Sciences, Université Laval, Quebec City - Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0009-4326-4165
Pierre LangevinCirris, School of Rehabilitation Sciences, Université Laval, Quebec City - Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4339-3687
Mathieu PichéChaire de Recherche Internationale en Santé Neuromusculosquelettique, Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières, Trois-Rivières - Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4171-2226
Yannick Tousignant-LaflammeCentre de recherche du CHUS, Université de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke - Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1133-8707

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: The presence of altered central pain processing and modulation, as well as negative psychological factors, have been suggested to impede recovery in chronic low back pain (CLBP). Psychologically-informed physiotherapy (PiP) aims to specifically address the latter factors-in addition to physical factors-to improve treatment effects. This study aims to determine if the effect of PiP is superior to usual physiotherapy (UP) on pain sensitivity and modulation in participants with CLBP and if changes in these variables were associated with changes in clinical outcomes. Methods: Forty participants with CLBP were randomly allocated to PiP or UP. Seven physiotherapy sessions over 6 weeks plus a booster session at an 11-week follow-up were delivered. Pressure pain threshold (PPT), temporal summation of pain (TSP), and exercise-induced hypoalgesia were assessed on lumbar, upper, and lower limb sites at baseline and after 6 weeks. Linear mixed models tested if PiP was superior to UP on pain sensitivity/modulation. Linear regressions tested if pain sensitivity/modulation changes were associated with changes in clinical outcomes (pain intensity, physical functioning, symptoms of central sensitization). Results: PiP was not superior to UP to modulate pain sensitivity/modulation variables. All PPTs increased after 6 weeks regardless of the approach. Lumbar PPT and lumbar and lower limb TSP changes were associated with physical functioning changes. Conclusion: Although our study suggests that neither approach has a superiority to impact on pain sensitivity, both approaches elicited widespread hypoalgesia. Future powered trials should verify if pain sensitivity can be a mediator of physical functioning improvement, as suggested by our results.

Indexed as

Exercise-induced hypoalgesiaPressure pain thresholdPsychologically informed physiotherapyQuantitative ­sensory testingTemporal summation of painUsual physiotherapy

Identifiers

PMID39974748
PMCPMC11836659

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

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.