Trial reportInternational orthopaedics2026
Evaluation of a multifunctional traction device for lumbar disc herniation: a prospective randomized controlled study using magnetic resonance imaging and clinical assessment.
Trial report in International orthopaedics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
- Response to the Letter regarding: Smoking increases the risk of early postoperative infection after elective total hip arthroplasty.International orthopaedics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundConventional traction therapy for LDH is widely used but has inconsistent efficacy in relieving pain and restoring motor function. Therefore, we designed and evaluated MTD that combines traction and rotation.
methodsA prospective randomized controlled trial with a follow-up period from January 2022 to July 2024.Patients with LDH were randomly allocated to receive either treatment with a multifunctional traction device combining traction and twisting (MTD group), or conventional lumbar traction therapy (Control group). A total of 47 patients (MTD, n = 23; Control, n = 24) completed the study and were included in the final analysis. The major outcome was assessing changes from baseline to post-treatment in Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores, Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) scores and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) evaluations.
resultsA total of 47 patients were included, with 23 in the MTD group and 24 in the control group. There were no specific differences between the two groups in terms of gender, age, height, weight, BMI, ODI, JOA or VAS scores at baseline date. Generalized estimating equation (GEE) analysis showed that ODI and VAS scores in the MTD group were lower compared to baseline (P < 0.05). MRI evaluation showed no notable differences between the groups in terms of Pfirrmann grading and disc protrusion severity (P > 0.05).
conclusionsThe MTD treatment is more effective in reducing low back pain and enhancing daily function than conventional treatment in patients with LDH.
trial registrationThis study has been registered in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR2100053940, https://www.chictr.org.cn ).
Indexed as
Identifiers
42113278What 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.