Matthew Fernandez1, Manuela L Ferreira2,3, Kathryn M Refshauge4, Jan Hartvigsen5,6, Isabela R C Silva4, Chris G Maher2, Bart W Koes7, Paulo H Ferreira4. 1. Faculty of Health Science, University of Sydney, 75 East Street, Lidcombe, Sydney, NSW, 2141, Australia. mfer4234@uni.sydney.edu.au. 2. The George Institute for Global Health, Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, 321 Kent Street, Sydney, NSW, 2000, Australia. 3. The Institute of Bone and Joint Research, Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia. 4. Faculty of Health Science, University of Sydney, 75 East Street, Lidcombe, Sydney, NSW, 2141, Australia. 5. Department of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics, University of Southern Denmark, Campusvej 55, 5230, Odense M, Denmark. 6. Nordic Institute of Chiropractic and Clinical Biomechanics, Odense M, Denmark. 7. Department of General Practice, Erasmus University Medical Centre, P.O. Box 2040, 3000, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Previous reviews have compared surgical to non-surgical management of sciatica, but have overlooked the specific comparison between surgery and physical activity-based interventions. METHODS: Systematic review using MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase and PEDro databases was conducted. Randomised controlled trials comparing surgery to physical activity, where patients were experiencing the three most common causes of sciatica-disc herniation, spondylolisthesis and spinal stenosis. Two independent reviewers extracted pain and disability data (converted to a common 0-100 scale) and assessed methodological quality using the PEDro scale. The size of the effects was estimated for each outcome at three different time points, with a random effects model adopted and the GRADE approach used in summary conclusions. RESULTS: Twelve trials were included. In the short term, surgery provided better outcomes than physical activity for disc herniation: disability [WMD -9.00 (95 % CI -13.73, -4.27)], leg pain [WMD -16.01 (95 % CI -23.00, -9.02)] and back pain [WMD -12.44 (95 % CI -17.76, -7.09)]; for spondylolisthesis: disability [WMD -14.60 (95 % CI -17.12, -12.08)], leg pain [WMD -35.00 (95 % CI -39.66, -30.34)] and back pain [WMD -20.00 (95 % CI -24.66, -15.34)] and spinal stenosis: disability [WMD -11.39 (95 % CI -17.31, -5.46)], leg pain [WMD, -27.17 (95 % CI -35.87, -18.46)] and back pain [WMD -20.80 (95 % CI -25.15, -16.44)]. Long-term and greater than 2-year post-randomisation results favoured surgery for spondylolisthesis and stenosis, although the size of the effects reduced with time. For disc herniation, no significant effect was shown for leg and back pain comparing surgery to physical activity. CONCLUSION: There are indications that surgery is superior to physical activity-based interventions in reducing pain and disability for disc herniation at short-term follow-up only; but high-quality evidence in this field is lacking (GRADE). For spondylolisthesis and spinal stenosis, surgery is superior to physical activity up to greater than 2 years follow-up. Results should guide clinicians and patients when facing the difficult decision of having surgery or engaging in active care interventions. PROSPERO registration number : CRD42013005746.
PURPOSE: Previous reviews have compared surgical to non-surgical management of sciatica, but have overlooked the specific comparison between surgery and physical activity-based interventions. METHODS: Systematic review using MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase and PEDro databases was conducted. Randomised controlled trials comparing surgery to physical activity, where patients were experiencing the three most common causes of sciatica-disc herniation, spondylolisthesis and spinal stenosis. Two independent reviewers extracted pain and disability data (converted to a common 0-100 scale) and assessed methodological quality using the PEDro scale. The size of the effects was estimated for each outcome at three different time points, with a random effects model adopted and the GRADE approach used in summary conclusions. RESULTS: Twelve trials were included. In the short term, surgery provided better outcomes than physical activity for disc herniation: disability [WMD -9.00 (95 % CI -13.73, -4.27)], leg pain [WMD -16.01 (95 % CI -23.00, -9.02)] and back pain [WMD -12.44 (95 % CI -17.76, -7.09)]; for spondylolisthesis: disability [WMD -14.60 (95 % CI -17.12, -12.08)], leg pain [WMD -35.00 (95 % CI -39.66, -30.34)] and back pain [WMD -20.00 (95 % CI -24.66, -15.34)] and spinal stenosis: disability [WMD -11.39 (95 % CI -17.31, -5.46)], leg pain [WMD, -27.17 (95 % CI -35.87, -18.46)] and back pain [WMD -20.80 (95 % CI -25.15, -16.44)]. Long-term and greater than 2-year post-randomisation results favoured surgery for spondylolisthesis and stenosis, although the size of the effects reduced with time. For disc herniation, no significant effect was shown for leg and back pain comparing surgery to physical activity. CONCLUSION: There are indications that surgery is superior to physical activity-based interventions in reducing pain and disability for disc herniation at short-term follow-up only; but high-quality evidence in this field is lacking (GRADE). For spondylolisthesis and spinal stenosis, surgery is superior to physical activity up to greater than 2 years follow-up. Results should guide clinicians and patients when facing the difficult decision of having surgery or engaging in active care interventions. PROSPERO registration number : CRD42013005746.
Authors: R Lewis; N Williams; H E Matar; N Din; D Fitzsimmons; C Phillips; M Jones; A Sutton; K Burton; S Nafees; M Hendry; I Rickard; R Chakraverty; C Wilkinson Journal: Health Technol Assess Date: 2011-11 Impact factor: 4.014
Authors: James N Weinstein; Tor D Tosteson; Jon D Lurie; Anna N A Tosteson; Brett Hanscom; Jonathan S Skinner; William A Abdu; Alan S Hilibrand; Scott D Boden; Richard A Deyo Journal: JAMA Date: 2006-11-22 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Gordon H Guyatt; Andrew D Oxman; Gunn E Vist; Regina Kunz; Yngve Falck-Ytter; Pablo Alonso-Coello; Holger J Schünemann Journal: BMJ Date: 2008-04-26
Authors: Steven J Atlas; Robert B Keller; Yen A Wu; Richard A Deyo; Daniel E Singer Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 2005-04-15 Impact factor: 3.468
Authors: Daniel E Cannon; Timothy R Dillingham; Haiyan Miao; Michael T Andary; Liliana E Pezzin Journal: Am J Phys Med Rehabil Date: 2007-12 Impact factor: 2.159
Authors: Matthew Fernandez; Craig Moore; Wenbo Peng; Katie de Luca; Katherine A Pohlman; Michael Swain; Jon Adams Journal: Chiropr Man Therap Date: 2019-04-17