Daphne Smith1, Nancy McMurray, Peter Disler. 1. Department of Medicine, University of Melbourne and Cedar Court Health South Rehabilitation Hospital, Camberwell, Victoria, Australia.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Several reviews of the treatment of acute low back pain have been published in the past and have formed the basis of clinical guidelines. However, these lack consistency in some areas and valid data in others. As the literature in this field has continued to expand, the present review was undertaken to establish whether the guidelines in current use are supported by more recently published, scientifically rigorous research, and whether additional consensus regarding treatment of acute low back injury has been forthcoming in recent years. DESIGN: A review, and critical analysis, of literature relating to the treatment of acute low back pain that has been published since the production of the currently used clinical guidelines. The guidelines have been reviewed to assess whether their recommendations remain supportable. CONCLUSIONS: Recent research appears to support current clinical guidelines, i.e. exercise may have a positive effect while bed rest is ineffective and may be harmful, simple analgesics and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) have short-term benefits, and spinal manipulation may be effective in the first four weeks; no evidence was found for traction or back schools. However, we need more randomized controlled trials of treatments shown to be successful with the chronic population, e.g. focused on understanding psychological determinants, and using a multidisciplinary biopsychosocial approach. In the future this may help us to prevent acute low back progressing to the chronic state.
OBJECTIVE: Several reviews of the treatment of acute low back pain have been published in the past and have formed the basis of clinical guidelines. However, these lack consistency in some areas and valid data in others. As the literature in this field has continued to expand, the present review was undertaken to establish whether the guidelines in current use are supported by more recently published, scientifically rigorous research, and whether additional consensus regarding treatment of acute low back injury has been forthcoming in recent years. DESIGN: A review, and critical analysis, of literature relating to the treatment of acute low back pain that has been published since the production of the currently used clinical guidelines. The guidelines have been reviewed to assess whether their recommendations remain supportable. CONCLUSIONS: Recent research appears to support current clinical guidelines, i.e. exercise may have a positive effect while bed rest is ineffective and may be harmful, simple analgesics and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) have short-term benefits, and spinal manipulation may be effective in the first four weeks; no evidence was found for traction or back schools. However, we need more randomized controlled trials of treatments shown to be successful with the chronic population, e.g. focused on understanding psychological determinants, and using a multidisciplinary biopsychosocial approach. In the future this may help us to prevent acute low back progressing to the chronic state.