OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of thermal mineral water, compared with tap water in the treatment of low back pain. METHODS: This randomized, double-blind, controlled, follow-up study included 71 patients who underwent 20-minute daily treatment sessions with medicinal water or with tap water, both at a temperature of 34 degrees C, on 21 occasions. Both groups underwent additional adjunctive electrotherapy. Outcome measures were visual analogue scale scores, Schober's sign, Domján's signs, Oswestry disability and Short Form-36 questionnaire. The study parameters were administered at baseline, immediately after treatment, and after 15 weeks. RESULTS: After treatment, there was a significant improvement in all parameters in the thermal water group. This improvement was still evident after 15 weeks. The improvement in the control group was less substantial compared with baseline values. Comparison of the 2 treatments revealed a statistically significant difference in 3 outcome parameters (visual analogue scale scores III, IV and Schober's index). In the subset of patients who completed the study according to the protocol, the greater efficacy of treatment with thermal water was also confirmed by the other study parameters. CONCLUSION: In the group treated with thermal water, improvement occurred earlier, lasted longer and was statistically significant.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of thermal mineral water, compared with tapwater in the treatment of low back pain. METHODS: This randomized, double-blind, controlled, follow-up study included 71 patients who underwent 20-minute daily treatment sessions with medicinal water or with tapwater, both at a temperature of 34 degrees C, on 21 occasions. Both groups underwent additional adjunctive electrotherapy. Outcome measures were visual analogue scale scores, Schober's sign, Domján's signs, Oswestry disability and Short Form-36 questionnaire. The study parameters were administered at baseline, immediately after treatment, and after 15 weeks. RESULTS: After treatment, there was a significant improvement in all parameters in the thermal water group. This improvement was still evident after 15 weeks. The improvement in the control group was less substantial compared with baseline values. Comparison of the 2 treatments revealed a statistically significant difference in 3 outcome parameters (visual analogue scale scores III, IV and Schober's index). In the subset of patients who completed the study according to the protocol, the greater efficacy of treatment with thermal water was also confirmed by the other study parameters. CONCLUSION: In the group treated with thermal water, improvement occurred earlier, lasted longer and was statistically significant.
Authors: Ildikó Katalin Tefner; András Németh; Andrea Lászlófi; Tímea Kis; Gyula Gyetvai; Tamás Bender Journal: Rheumatol Int Date: 2011-09-27 Impact factor: 2.631
Authors: Tamás Gáti; Ildikó Katalin Tefner; Lajos Kovács; Katalin Hodosi; Tamás Bender Journal: Int J Biometeorol Date: 2018-01-10 Impact factor: 3.787