Literature DB >> 2872260

Comparison of chiropractic and hospital outpatient management of low back pain: a feasibility study. Report of a working group.

.   

Abstract

This is the report of a feasibility study of a randomised controlled trial of chiropractic and hospital outpatient management for low back pain of mechanical origin. Preparations for the study included an approach to the General Medical Council for guidance about the intended collaboration between medically qualified and heterodox practitioners, detailed communication with local general practitioners, and the provision of a Medical Research Council (MRC) grant to cover payments to the chiropractors for work carried out in the course of the study. A total of 238 patients were considered, 197 of whom had initially presented to Northwick Park Hospital and the remaining 41 to the chiropractic clinic in Harrow. Only 6% of the patients presenting to the hospital refused to enter. The single most frequent reason for ineligibility in the hospital patients was freedom from pain at the time of the first hospital visit (23%). A variety of medical contraindications accounted for the exclusion of a further 24% of hospital patients. Patients presenting to the chiropractic group tended to have had shorter current episodes of back pain but to have had more NHS treatment in the past than those presenting to hospital. The commonest reason for exclusion among those presenting to the chiropractic clinic was refusal to enter (34%). Only 5% of the chiropractic patients were ineligible for medical reasons. Overall, 16% of those presenting to hospital and 44% of those presenting to the chiropractors were eligible and willing to enter the randomised treatment phase of the study. Of the 50 patients who entered the treatment phase, all but seven completed treatment and the six weekly self-completed assessments of progress. Patients whose current episodes had lasted less than a month progressed significantly more rapidly than those with longer current episodes. It is likely that sufficient numbers of patients with low back pain are prepared to take part in a formal randomized controlled trial. The organization and working methods for such a trial appear to be feasible. A full scale multicentre trial should aim to include about 2000 patients.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1986        PMID: 2872260      PMCID: PMC1052482          DOI: 10.1136/jech.40.1.12

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health        ISSN: 0143-005X            Impact factor:   3.710


  9 in total

1.  Controlled trial of mobilisation and manipulation for low back pain: hospital patients.

Authors:  H Sims-Williams; M I Jayson; S M Young; H Baddeley; E Collins
Journal:  Br Med J       Date:  1979-11-24

2.  Sequential treatment assignment with balancing for prognostic factors in the controlled clinical trial.

Authors:  S J Pocock; R Simon
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1975-03       Impact factor: 2.571

3.  A study of the natural history of back pain. Part I: development of a reliable and sensitive measure of disability in low-back pain.

Authors:  M Roland; R Morris
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1983-03       Impact factor: 3.468

4.  Applying results of randomised trials to clinical practice: impact of losses before randomisation.

Authors:  M E Charlson; R I Horwitz
Journal:  Br Med J (Clin Res Ed)       Date:  1984-11-10

5.  The Oswestry low back pain disability questionnaire.

Authors:  J C Fairbank; J Couper; J B Davies; J P O'Brien
Journal:  Physiotherapy       Date:  1980-08       Impact factor: 3.358

6.  Manipulation in treatment of low back pain: a multicentre study.

Authors:  D M Doran; D J Newell
Journal:  Br Med J       Date:  1975-04-26

7.  Multicentre trial of physiotherapy in the management of sciatic symptoms.

Authors:  C E Coxhead; H Inskip; T W Meade; W R North; J D Troup
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1981-05-16       Impact factor: 79.321

8.  Remedial therapy after stroke: a randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  D S Smith; E Goldenberg; A Ashburn; G Kinsella; K Sheikh; P J Brennan; T W Meade; D W Zutshi; J D Perry; J S Reeback
Journal:  Br Med J (Clin Res Ed)       Date:  1981-02-14

9.  Chiropractors and the treatment of back pain.

Authors:  A C Breen
Journal:  Rheumatol Rehabil       Date:  1977-02
  9 in total
  6 in total

1.  Outcome scores in spinal surgery quantified: excellent, good, fair and poor in terms of patient-completed tools.

Authors:  Suhayl I Tafazal; Philip J Sell
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2005-12-21       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  Multimodal chiropractic care of pain and disability for a patient diagnosed with benign joint hypermobility syndrome: a case report.

Authors:  Richard G Strunk; Mark T Pfefer; Derrick Dube
Journal:  J Chiropr Med       Date:  2014-03

3.  Development of a German version of the Oswestry Disability Index. Part 2: sensitivity to change after spinal surgery.

Authors:  A F Mannion; A Junge; D Grob; J Dvorak; J C T Fairbank
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2005-04-26       Impact factor: 3.134

4.  Low back pain of mechanical origin: randomised comparison of chiropractic and hospital outpatient treatment.

Authors:  T W Meade; S Dyer; W Browne; J Townsend; A O Frank
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1990-06-02

5.  Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: Objective Measurement Scales and Ambulatory Status.

Authors:  Hussam Abou-Al-Shaar; Owoicho Adogwa; Ankit I Mehta
Journal:  Asian Spine J       Date:  2018-07-27

6.  Influence of elastic lumbar support belts on trunk muscle function in patients with non-specific acute lumbar back pain.

Authors:  Christoph Anders; Agnes Hübner
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-01-24       Impact factor: 3.240

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.