Dataset Information

Acupuncture for acute non-specific low back pain: a randomised, controlled, multicentre intervention study in general practice-the Acuback study.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

The aim of this study was to evaluate whether a single treatment session of acupuncture, when applied in addition to standard treatment for acute low back pain (ALBP), reduces the time to recovery compared with standard treatment alone.

Design

A multicentre, randomised, controlled trial.

Setting

Conducted at 11 Norwegian general practitioners' (GPs') offices.

Participants

171 adults aged 20-55 years seeking their GP for ALBP (≤14 days) between March 2014 and March 2017. Patients with secondary back pain and previous sick leave and acupuncture treatment was excluded.

Interventions

The participants were randomised to either the control group (CG) or the acupuncture group (AG) by online software. The CG received standard treatment according to the Norwegian guidelines, while the AG received one session of Western medical acupuncture treatment in addition to standard treatment. The statistician was blinded to group status.

Primary and secondary outcome measures

The primary outcome was median days to recovery. Secondary outcomes were pain intensity, global improvement, back-specific functional status, sick leave, medication and adverse effects.

Results

185 participants were randomised, 95 in the CG and 90 in the AG. 14 participants did not receive the allocated intervention and 4 were excluded from the analysis. Thus, 167 participants were included in the analysis, 86 in the CG and 81 in the AG. The groups were similar according to baseline characteristics. The median time to recovery was 14 days for the CG and 9 days for the AG, HR 1.37 (95% CI 0.95 to 1.96), (p=0.089). No serious adverse effects were reported.

Conclusions

We did not find any statistically significant reduction in time-to-recovery after a single session of acupuncture for ALBP compared with standard care.

Trial registration number

NCT01439412.

SUBMITTER: Skonnord T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7412620 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Acupuncture for acute non-specific low back pain: a randomised, controlled, multicentre intervention study in general practice-the Acuback study.

Skonnord Trygve T Skjeie Holgeir H Brekke Mette M Klovning Atle A Grotle Margreth M Aas Eline E Mdala Ibrahimu I Fetveit Arne A

BMJ open 20200806 8

<h4>Objectives</h4>The aim of this study was to evaluate whether a single treatment session of acupuncture, when applied in addition to standard treatment for acute low back pain (ALBP), reduces the time to recovery compared with standard treatment alone.<h4>Design</h4>A multicentre, randomised, controlled trial.<h4>Setting</h4>Conducted at 11 Norwegian general practitioners' (GPs') offices.<h4>Participants</h4>171 adults aged 20-55 years seeking their GP for ALBP (≤14 days) between March 2014 a ...[more]

PMID: 32764081

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionDiscogenic low back pain is a common form of chronic low back pain. In traditional Chinese medicine, combinations of acupuncture and herbal medicine are frequently used to manage this condition. However, evidence for the efficacy of a combined approach remains scarce. To address this gap, we designed a multicentre, randomised controlled trial to compare the effects of the combined use of acupuncture and Chinese herbal medicine, and their separate applications along with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, in treating discogenic low back pain.Methods and analysisThis is a multicentre, prospective, randomised, four-arm, parallel-controlled trial involving patients with discogenic low back pain. Patients will be randomly divided into four groups (acupuncture combined with herbal medicine, acupuncture, herbal medicine and positive drug control) at a 1:1:1:1 ratio. All patients will undergo a 4-week treatment regimen consisting of acupuncture (active or sham acupuncture) and oral medication (herbal medicine or placebo granules and celecoxib or placebo capsules), as well as a 3-month follow-up assessment. The primary outcome measure will be pain intensity, measured using the Visual Analogue Scale after a 4-week treatment period. Secondary outcome measures will include the lumbar pressure pain threshold, pain-related disability measured using the Oswestry Disability Index, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index, 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey and incidence of adverse events. Assuming an SD of 1.8, minimal clinically important difference of 1.5 and a 10% dropout rate, at least 97 participants per group are needed, totalling 388 participants.Ethics and disseminationThe study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Dongzhimen Hospital Affiliated with Beijing University of Chinese Medicine (approval number: 2024DZMEC-083-03) and the other seven participating subcentres. All participants will provide written informed consent. This trial will be conducted in accordance with the principles outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki and its amendments. This work will be disseminated through the publication of peer-reviewed manuscripts.Trial registration numberChiCTR2400082428.

Project description:BackgroundEvidence generated from reliable research is not frequently implemented into clinical practice. Evidence-based clinical practice guidelines are a potential vehicle to achieve this. A recent systematic review of implementation strategies of guideline dissemination concluded that there was a lack of evidence regarding effective strategies to promote the uptake of guidelines. Recommendations from this review, and other studies, have suggested the use of interventions that are theoretically based because these may be more effective than those that are not. An evidence-based clinical practice guideline for the management of acute low back pain was recently developed in Australia. This provides an opportunity to develop and test a theory-based implementation intervention for a condition which is common, has a high burden, and for which there is an evidence-practice gap in the primary care setting.AimThis study aims to test the effectiveness of a theory-based intervention for implementing a clinical practice guideline for acute low back pain in general practice in Victoria, Australia. Specifically, our primary objectives are to establish if the intervention is effective in reducing the percentage of patients who are referred for a plain x-ray, and improving mean level of disability for patients three months post-consultation.Methods/designThis study protocol describes the details of a cluster randomised controlled trial. Ninety-two general practices (clusters), which include at least one consenting general practitioner, will be randomised to an intervention or control arm using restricted randomisation. Patients aged 18 years or older who visit a participating practitioner for acute non-specific low back pain of less than three months duration will be eligible for inclusion. An average of twenty-five patients per general practice will be recruited, providing a total of 2,300 patient participants. General practitioners in the control arm will receive access to the guideline using the existing dissemination strategy. Practitioners in the intervention arm will be invited to participate in facilitated face-to-face workshops that have been underpinned by behavioural theory. Investigators (not involved in the delivery of the intervention), patients, outcome assessors and the study statistician will be blinded to group allocation.

Project description:INTRODUCTION: This cluster randomised trial evaluated an intervention to decrease x-ray referrals and increase giving advice to stay active for people with acute low back pain (LBP) in general practice. METHODS: General practices were randomised to either access to a guideline for acute LBP (control) or facilitated interactive workshops (intervention). We measured behavioural predictors (e.g. knowledge, attitudes and intentions) and fear avoidance beliefs. We were unable to recruit sufficient patients to measure our original primary outcomes so we introduced other outcomes measured at the general practitioner (GP) level: behavioural simulation (clinical decision about vignettes) and rates of x-ray and CT-scan (medical administrative data). All those not involved in the delivery of the intervention were blinded to allocation. RESULTS: 47 practices (53 GPs) were randomised to the control and 45 practices (59 GPs) to the intervention. The number of GPs available for analysis at 12 months varied by outcome due to missing confounder information; a minimum of 38 GPs were available from the intervention group, and a minimum of 40 GPs from the control group. For the behavioural constructs, although effect estimates were small, the intervention group GPs had greater intention of practising consistent with the guideline for the clinical behaviour of x-ray referral. For behavioural simulation, intervention group GPs were more likely to adhere to guideline recommendations about x-ray (OR 1.76, 95%CI 1.01, 3.05) and more likely to give advice to stay active (OR 4.49, 95%CI 1.90 to 10.60). Imaging referral was not statistically significantly different between groups and the potential importance of effects was unclear; rate ratio 0.87 (95%CI 0.68, 1.10) for x-ray or CT-scan. CONCLUSIONS: The intervention led to small changes in GP intention to practice in a manner that is consistent with an evidence-based guideline, but it did not result in statistically significant changes in actual behaviour. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN012606000098538.

Project description:BackgroundGuidelines are often slowly adapted into clinical practice. However, actively supporting healthcare professionals in evidence-based treatment may speed up guideline implementation. Danish low back pain (LBP) guidelines focus on primary care treatment of LBP, to reduce referrals from primary care to secondary care. The primary aim of this project was to reduce secondary care referral within 12 weeks by a multifaceted implementation strategy (MuIS).MethodsIn a cluster randomised design, 189 general practices from the North Denmark Region were invited to participate. Practices were randomised (1:1) and stratified by practice size to MuIS (28 practices) or a passive implementation strategy (PaIS; 32 practices). Included were patients with LBP aged 18 to 65 years who were able to complete questionnaires, had no serious underlying pathology, and were not pregnant. We developed a MuIS including outreach visits, quality reports, and the STarT Back Tool for subgrouping patients with LBP. Both groups were offered the usual dissemination of guidelines, guideline-concordant structuring of the medical record, and a new referral opportunity for patients with psycho-social problems. In an intention-to-treat analysis, the primary and secondary outcomes pertained to the patient, and a cost-effectiveness analysis was performed from a healthcare sector perspective. Patients and the assessment of outcomes were blinded. Practices and caregivers delivering the interventions were not blinded.ResultsBetween January 2013 and July 2014, 60 practices were included, of which 54 practices (28 MuIS, 26 PaIS) included 1101 patients (539 MuIS, 562 PaIS). Follow-up data for the primary outcome were available on 100 % of these patients. Twenty-seven patients (5.0 %) in the MuIS group were referred to secondary care vs. 59 patients (10.5 %) in the PaIS group. The adjusted odds ratio (AOR) was 0.52 [95 % CI 0.30 to 0.90; p = 0.020]. The MuIS was cost-saving £-93.20 (£406.51 vs. £499.71 per patient) after 12 weeks. Conversely, the MuIS resulted in less satisfied patients after 52 weeks (AOR 0.50 [95 % CI 0.31 to 0.81; p = 0.004]).ConclusionsUsing a MuIS changed general practice referral behaviour and was cost effective, but patients in the MuIS group were less satisfied. This study supports the application of a MuIS when implementing guidelines.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01699256.

Dataset Information

Acupuncture for acute non-specific low back pain: a randomised, controlled, multicentre intervention study in general practice-the Acuback study.

Objectives

Design

Setting

Participants

Interventions

Primary and secondary outcome measures

Results

Conclusions

Trial registration number

Publications

Acupuncture for acute non-specific low back pain: a randomised, controlled, multicentre intervention study in general practice-the Acuback study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets