Comparative Effectiveness of Collaborative Treatment with Korean and Western Medicine for Low Back Pain: A Prospective Cohort Study.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Lee HY
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8342155 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Background:Low back pain (LBP) is a major burden in Korea. Despite its high prevalence, the government and the public health sector do not address the specific evidences of symptom control and prevention of LBP to reduce long-term healthcare costs and increase the quality of life. Thus, the Korean medicine sector encourages to collection and analysis of the medical utilization pattern of patients with LBP in Korea to provide evidences of LBP control strategy as well as political decisions. Methods:KLOS, a prospective, multi-center, patient registry pilot study will collaborate with 7 traditional Korean medicine hospitals and recruit patients with LBP into the registry. A total of 150 eligible patients with new episodes of LBP, who visit a Korean hospital without any other treatment history, will be enrolled in the registry. After enrollment, we will collect the individual characteristics of each patient, such as pain intensity, LBP-related daily disability, anthropometrics, and Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) at baseline and FU1 and FU2. We will also access the patients' clinical and administrative electronic records to analyze the pattern of patients' resource utilization. Overall, the aims of KLOS are to (1) explore the general characteristics of patients with new episodes of LBP and (2) evaluate the efficacy and safety of various Korean medicine treatments for LBP, based on nationwide registry outcome collecting process. Discussion:The first pilot study of prospective, multi-center registry of newly diagnosed LBP patients in traditional Korean medicine hospitals. The result of this study may show the current status of LBP patients who receive Korean medicine treatments and provide evidences for reasonable decision-making on Korean medicine healthcare policy in the future. Trial registration number:ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02418286.
| S-EPMC7360851 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVES:Chronic low-back pain (CLBP) is burdensome and costly, and a common condition for which adults use integrative therapies. The effectiveness of multidisciplinary integrative approaches has not been well studied. The purpose of this observational study was to compare characteristics and outcomes of CLBP patients treated at the Osher Clinical Center (OCC) versus other clinics at Brigham and Women's Hospital. DESIGN:Observational comparative effectiveness study. SETTING:Tertiary care hospital. SUBJECTS:Patients ?21 years with 3+ months of CLBP or 6+ months of intermittent low-back pain. INTERVENTION:All patients were observed for 12 months. OCC patients received care at the integrative clinic (7.3 visits on average over 13 weeks); non-OCC patients received usual care at other clinics of the same hospital. OUTCOME MEASURES:Primary outcomes: change from baseline to 6 months in functional status (Roland Disability Questionnaire [RDQ]) and bothersomeness of pain (BOP). SECONDARY OUTCOMES:change in RDQ and BOP at 3 and 12 months, percentages of patients with clinically meaningful (?30%) improvements. RESULTS:One hundred fifty-six OCC and 153 non-OCC participants were enrolled; follow-up was 90.4 and 98.0%, respectively, at 12 months. There were substantial differences in baseline characteristics between groups. For RDQ, the adjusted mean group difference was nonsignificant at 6 months; for BOP, the differences were significant, but clinically small. At 12 months, the observed benefit on RDQ was significant and clinically meaningful; for BOP, there were significant, but clinically small differences. Percentages of patients with ?30% improvements in RDQ were significantly greater in the OCC group only at 12 months, and both 6 and 12 months for BOP. CONCLUSIONS:Baseline characteristics can differ between those who select different sources of healthcare for CLBP. While benefits seen in the OCC versus non-OCC clinics were not large, further evaluation through randomized trials might be warranted to provide a more definitive evaluation.
| S-EPMC6103251 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The purpose of this systematic review was to assess the effects of spinal manipulative therapy (SMT), acupuncture and herbal medicine for chronic non-specific LBP. A comprehensive search was conducted by an experienced librarian from the Cochrane Back Review Group (CBRG) in multiple databases up to December 22, 2008. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of adults with chronic non-specific LBP, which evaluated at least one clinically relevant, patient-centred outcome measure were included. Two authors working independently from one another assessed the risk of bias using the criteria recommended by the CBRG and extracted the data. The data were pooled when clinically homogeneous and statistically possible or were otherwise qualitatively described. GRADE was used to determine the quality of the evidence. In total, 35 RCTs (8 SMT, 20 acupuncture, 7 herbal medicine), which examined 8,298 patients, fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Approximately half of these (2 SMT, 8 acupuncture, 7 herbal medicine) were thought to have a low risk of bias. In general, the pooled effects for the studied interventions demonstrated short-term relief or improvement only. The lack of studies with a low-risk of bias, especially in regard to SMT precludes any strong conclusions; however, the principal findings, which are based upon low- to very-low-quality evidence, suggest that SMT does not provide a more clinically beneficial effect compared with sham, passive modalities or any other intervention for treatment of chronic low-back pain. There is evidence, however, that acupuncture provides a short-term clinically relevant effect when compared with a waiting list control or when acupuncture is added to another intervention. Although there are some good results for individual herbal medicines in short-term individual trials, the lack of homogeneity across studies did not allow for a pooled estimate of the effect. In general, these results are in agreement with other recent systematic reviews on SMT, but in contrast with others. These results are also in agreement with recent reviews on acupuncture and herbal medicine. Randomized trials with a low risk of bias and adequate sample sizes are directly needed.
| S-EPMC2989199 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionChronic low back pain disorders (CLBDs) present a substantial societal burden; however, optimal treatment remains debated. To date, pairwise and network meta-analyses have evaluated individual treatment modes, yet a comparison of a wide range of common treatments is required to evaluate their relative effectiveness. Using network meta-analysis, we aim to evaluate the effectiveness of treatments (acupuncture, education or advice, electrophysical agents, exercise, manual therapies/manipulation, massage, the McKenzie method, pharmacotherapy, psychological therapies, surgery, epidural injections, percutaneous treatments, traction, physical therapy, multidisciplinary pain management, placebo, 'usual care' and/or no treatment) on pain intensity, disability and/or mental health in patients with CLBDs.Methods and analysisSix electronic databases and reference lists of 285 prior systematic reviews were searched. Eligible studies will be randomised controlled/clinical trials (including cross-over and cluster designs) that examine individual treatments or treatment combinations in adult patients with CLBDs. Studies must be published in English, German or Chinese as a full-journal publication in a peer-reviewed journal. A narrative approach will be used to synthesise and report qualitative and quantitative data, and, where feasible, network meta-analyses will be performed. Reporting of the review will be informed by Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidance, including the network meta-analysis extension (PRISMA-NMA). The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach for network meta-analysis will be implemented for assessing the quality of the findings.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval is not required for this systematic review of the published data. Findings will be disseminated via peer-reviewed publication.Prospero registration numberPROSPERO registration number CRD42020182039.
| S-EPMC8634013 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIn Korea, there exists a dual medical license system whereby both traditional Korean medicine and Western medicine doctors practice independently. In 2009, via medical law revision, cross employment was allowed to activate Korean medicine and Western medicine collaborative treatment (KWCT). Despite its several advantages, there are several barriers to a well-organized KWCT. To activate KWCT, we investigated perception, attitude, demand of medical occupational groups and research gap via scoping review.MethodsScoping review is an emerging methodology for knowledge synthesis adopting the Arksey and O'Malley framework. The research question was "What is known about perception, attitude, demand, and research gap on KWCT?" We searched articles published from 2009 to 2019 in 7 Korean and 4 English databases. We conducted descriptive and qualitative thematic analysis and presented the research gap.ResultsFrom 1,305 articles, 6 quantitative and 3 qualitative studies were included. In quantitative studies, perception and attitude of medical occupational groups did not change markedly. For better perception and attitude, experiencing, mutual understanding, and respect should precede. Academic exchange, education, supporting KWCT research and legal/institutional/administrative support is also important. In qualitative studies, education course, guidelines, trust, safety, academic integration, and scientification were also required. We found several research gaps about KWCT especially detailed on-site demand and activation strategy about KWCT.ConclusionWe investigated perception, attitude, and demand on KWCT. Based on research gap in our scoping review, quantitative studies using validated questionnaire and in-depth interview are needed to identify on-site demand to improve KWCT implementation.Protocol registrationhttps://www.researchregistry.com/(reviewregistry830).
| S-EPMC7476236 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Dry needling (DN) is a standard procedure for treating musculoskeletal disorders. However, there are no clear recommendations for using DN in low back pain (LBP). Therefore, this study aimed to assess the effectiveness of the novel DN program for reducing pain intensity and improving functional efficiency in patients with chronic LBP. A group of 40 patients with chronic LBP due to the L5-S1 discopathy were eligible and randomized into experimental (n = 20) and control (n = 20) groups. The DN program was performed for the experimental group according to the Five Regulatory Systems (FRS) concept. The control group received sham therapy using placebo needles. DN sessions were performed twice a week for 4 weeks. A single needling application lasted 60 min. Both groups received standard treatment and physical exercise of LBP for 1 month. Subjective pain was measured by a visual analog scale (VAS), functional efficiency was assessed with the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and the lower spine range of motion was measured with the Schober test. There were significant differences in pain reduction (VAS) in both groups (p < 0.001). The strongest analgesic effect in the DN group yielded 6.45 points immediately after the therapy, 6.2 points after 1 month, and 6 points after 3 months. The DN group scored higher VAS reduction than the control group (p < 0.001). There were significant differences in the functional state (ODI) in the experimental group (p < 0.001). There was a significant ODI decrease by 18.1 points, after 1 month by 18.9 points, and after 3 months by 17.6 points. No significant differences were found in the control group (p > 0.05). Intergroup differences were observed in the functional efficiency in ODI in all measurement time-points (p < 0.001). There were significant differences in the range of motion (Schober test) in the DN group (main effect: p < 0.001). For all measurements, differences (p < 0.001) were observed in favor of DN compared to the control. In conclusion, DN program according to the FRS concept stands for the novel treatment method supplemented by an exercise program, effectively reducing pain and improving functional efficiency in LBP patients.
| S-EPMC9500077 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionCurrent residency didactic schedules that are built upon hour-long, lecture-based presentations are incongruous with adult learning theory and the needs of millennial generation residents. An alternative to the traditional lecture, the flipped classroom involves viewing a short video lecture at home, followed by an active discussion during class time. This module was developed for emergency medicine residents and rotating medical students without previous training on the subject.MethodsThe at-home portion of the module was designed to be delivered at home, while the in-class discussion was designed to be carried out over 30-45 minutes during a regularly scheduled didactic time. Small-group size may be determined by faculty availability, though groups of five are optimal. There is no requirement for faculty preparation prior to the in-class session. Associated materials include objectives, the at-home video, a discussion guide for faculty facilitators, a case-based handout for students and residents, and assessment questions. We assessed our module with a pretest, immediate posttest, and the posttest again after 90 days.ResultsThe mean pretest score was 66%, mean posttest score 76%, and mean retention test score 66%. There was an immediate increase of 10%, which did not remain at 90 days.DiscussionWe developed a flipped classroom module that can be implemented in any emergency medicine residency or clerkship. It addresses the theoretical challenges posed to traditional conference didactics by increasing the focus on problem solving and self-directed learning.
| S-EPMC6464443 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Recent evidence suggests that physical therapy interventions targeting the hips may improve outcomes, including pain and disability, for patients with low back pain (LBP). Currently, there is conflicting data in regard to whether an individual with LBP needs to have a concurrent hip impairment in order to respond to this approach. The purpose of this clinical trial will be to determine the short and long-term effectiveness of physical therapy interventions directed at the lumbar spine only, versus lumbar spine and hip(s), in individuals with a primary complaint of LBP with a concurrent hip impairment. METHODS:A multi-center, randomized controlled trial of 76 adult individuals with a primary complaint of LBP, who also have at least one concurrent hip impairment. Participants will be randomized into the 'LBP only' or 'LBP+Hip' group. Treatment to the low back in both groups will be a pragmatic approach consisting of interventions targeting the low back without targeting the hip(s). Participants randomized to the LBP+Hip group will also receive a semi-prescriptive set of manual therapy and exercise techniques that target the hips. The primary outcome measures will be the modified Oswestry Disability Index and the Numeric Pain Rating Scale at discharge. DISCUSSION:These two treatment strategies are commonly utilized in physical therapy practice, but there is uncertainty which is superior. This trial will also help to provide a better understanding of the role of concurrent hip impairments in LBP. TRIAL REGISTRATION:This trial has been prospectively registered at clinicaltrials.gov (ID# NCT03550014, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03550014) on June 7, 2018.
| S-EPMC6157455 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundFew prospective cohort studies of workplace low back pain (LBP) with quantified job physical exposure have been performed. There are few prospective epidemiological studies for LBP occupational risk factors and reported data generally have few adjustments for many personal and psychosocial factors.Methods/designA multi-center prospective cohort study has been incepted to quantify risk factors for LBP and potentially develop improved methods for designing and analyzing jobs. Due to the subjectivity of LBP, six measures of LBP are captured: 1) any LBP, 2) LBP ≥ 5/10 pain rating, 3) LBP with medication use, 4) LBP with healthcare provider visits, 5) LBP necessitating modified work duties and 6) LBP with lost work time. Workers have thus far been enrolled from 30 different employment settings in 4 diverse US states and performed widely varying work. At baseline, workers undergo laptop-administered questionnaires, structured interviews, and two standardized physical examinations to ascertain demographics, medical history, psychosocial factors, hobbies and physical activities, and current musculoskeletal disorders. All workers' jobs are individually measured for physical factors and are videotaped. Workers are followed monthly for the development of low back pain. Changes in jobs necessitate re-measure and re-videotaping of job physical factors. The lifetime cumulative incidence of low back pain will also include those with a past history of low back pain. Incident cases will exclude prevalent cases at baseline. Statistical methods planned include survival analyses and logistic regression.DiscussionData analysis of a prospective cohort study of low back pain is underway and has successfully enrolled over 800 workers to date.
| S-EPMC3599364 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Neck pain (NP) and low back pain (LBP) are common symptoms bothering people in daily life. Traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) has been used to treat various symptoms and diseases in China and has been demonstrated to be effective. The objective of the present study was to review and analyze the existing data about pain and disability in TCM treatments for NP and LBP.Studies were identified by a comprehensive search of databases, such as MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library, up to September 1, 2013. A meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of TCM in managing NP and LBP.Seventy five randomized controlled trials (n = 11077) were included. Almost all of the studies investigated individuals experiencing chronic NP (CNP) or chronic LBP (CLBP). We found moderate evidence that acupuncture was more effective than sham-acupuncture in reducing pain immediately post-treatment for CNP (visual analogue scale (VAS) 10 cm, mean difference (MD) = -0.58 (-0.94, -0.22), 95% confidence interval, p = 0.01), CLBP (standardized mean difference = -0.47 (-0.77, -0.17), p = 0.003), and acute LBP (VAS 10 cm, MD = -0.99 (-1.24, -0.73), p< 0.001). Cupping could be more effective than waitlist in VAS (100 mm) (MD = -19.10 (-27.61, -10.58), p < 0. 001) for CNP or medications (e.g. NSAID) for CLBP (MD = -5.4 (-8.9, -0.19), p = 0.003). No serious or life-threatening adverse effects were found.Acupuncture, acupressure, and cupping could be efficacious in treating the pain and disability associated with CNP or CLBP in the immediate term. Gua sha, tai chi, qigong, and Chinese manipulation showed fair effects, but we were unable to draw any definite conclusions, and further research is still needed. The efficacy of tuina and moxibustion is unknown because no direct evidence was obtained. These TCM modalities are relatively safe.
| S-EPMC4339195 | biostudies-literature