Physical Therapy for Spinal Pain: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

2017 ◽  
Vol 17 (10) ◽  
pp. S205-S206
Author(s):  
Xie En
2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 1038 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruben D. Hidalgo-Agudo ◽  
David Lucena-Anton ◽  
Carlos Luque-Moreno ◽  
Alberto Marcos Heredia-Rizo ◽  
Jose A. Moral-Munoz

Parkinson’s disease (PD) represents the second most common neurodegenerative disease. Currently, conventional physical therapy is complemented by additional physical interventions with recreational components, improving different motor conditions in people with PD. This review aims to evaluate the effectiveness of additional physical interventions to conventional physical therapy in Parkinson’s disease. A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials were performed. The literature search was conducted in PubMed, Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro), Scopus, SciELO and Web of Science. The PEDro scale was used to evaluate the methodological quality of the studies. A total of 11 randomized controlled trials were included in this review. Five of them contributed information to the meta-analysis. The statistical analysis showed favorable results for dance-based therapy in motor balance: (Timed Up and Go: standardized mean difference (SMD) = −1.16; 95% Confidence Interval (CI):(−2.30 to −0.03); Berg Balance Scale: SMD = 4.05; 95%CI:(1.34 to 6.75)). Aquatic interventions showed favorable results in balance confidence (Activities-Specific Balance Confidence: SMD=10.10; 95%CI:(2.27 to 17.93)). The results obtained in this review highlight the potential benefit of dance-based therapy in functional balance for people with Parkinson’s disease, recommending its incorporation in clinical practice. Nonetheless, many aspects require clarification through further research and high-quality studies on this subject.


2019 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 196-218 ◽  
Author(s):  
K.K.N. Ho ◽  
P.H. Ferreira ◽  
M.B. Pinheiro ◽  
D. Aquino Silva ◽  
C.B. Miller ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 1;24 (1;1) ◽  
pp. 41-59

BACKGROUND: Epidural injections have been extensively used since their description in 1901, and steroids since their first utilization in 1952. Multiple randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews have reached discordant conclusions regarding the effectiveness of sodium chloride solution and steroids in managing spinal pain. True placebo-controlled trials with the injection of an inactive substance to unrelated structures have been nonexistent. Consequently, the discussions continue to escalate, seemingly without proper discourse. In this review, we sought to assess the true placebo nature of saline and the effectiveness of steroids. OBJECTIVES: This assessment of sodium chloride solution is undertaken to assess if it is a true placebo when injected into the epidural space, is effective alone, and whether steroids are effective when injected with sodium chloride solution rather than local anesthetic in managing spinal pain. STUDY DESIGN: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials utilizing sodium chloride solution alone, steroids alone, or sodium chloride solution with steroids in managing spinal pain secondary to disc herniation or spinal stenosis. METHODS: The systematic review was performed utilizing Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). Cochrane review criteria and Interventional Pain Management techniques--Quality Appraisal of Reliability and Risk of Bias Assessment (IPM–QRB) was used to assess the methodological quality assessment. Qualitative analysis was performed by utilizing best evidence synthesis principles, and quantitative analysis was performed utilizing meta-analysis with conventional methodology and single-arm meta-analysis. PubMed, Cochrane Library, US National Guideline Clearinghouse, Google Scholar, and prior systematic reviews and reference lists were utilized in the literature search from 1966 through December 2018. The evidence was summarized utilizing principles of best evidence synthesis on a scale of 1 to 5. Outcome measures for the present analysis, 20% improvement from the baseline pain scores or disability scores was considered clinically significant. Effectiveness was determined short-term if it was less than 6 months, whereas longer than 6 months was considered to be long-term. RESULTS: Of the 8 trials meeting inclusion criteria, 2 trials utilized fluoroscopic imaging and one study utilized ultrasound. All other studies performed the procedure without fluoroscopy. With dual-arm meta-analysis, there was no significant difference between epidural sodium chloride solution and epidural steroids with sodium chloride solution. Utilizing single-arm analysis, both epidural saline and epidural steroids with saline were effective in reducing 20% of pain, however, only reducing disability scores by 10% to 12%. Based on the qualitative analysis, epidural saline and epidural steroids with saline showed effect beyond placebo and showed level I, or strong evidence, that neither epidural saline, nor epidural steroids with saline are placebo and that both are effective. LIMITATIONS: Despite 8 randomized controlled trials, only 2 of them utilized fluoroscopy. Overall evidence is considered less than optimal and further studies elucidating these actions are strongly recommended. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this systematic review and meta-analysis show that epidurally administered sodium chloride solution and sodium chloride solution with steroids may be effective in managing low back and lower extremity pain. Consequently, the findings of this review provide information that epidurally administered sodium chloride solution is not a true placebo. KEY WORDS: Chronic low back pain, epidural injections, local anesthetic, sodium chloride solution, steroids, placebo effect


2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (4_suppl3) ◽  
pp. 2325967120S0021
Author(s):  
Maria Schwabe ◽  
Abby L Cheng ◽  
Cecilia Pascual-Garrido ◽  
Marcie Harris-Hayes ◽  
Michael Harris ◽  
...  

Introduction: Both physical therapy (PT) and surgery appear to have some efficacy in treating femoroacetabular impingement (FAI). Only recently have high-level evidence studies compared these two options, though results of these randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are contradictory. The purpose of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs comparing PT and surgery in patients with FAI. Methods: A systematic review was performed to identify randomized trials comparing FAI and PT. Data was extracted for demographics, study design, patient reported outcomes (PROs), and study quality/bias. In total, 819 abstracts were reviewed, with three RCTs identified (Griffin 2018, Mansell 2018, and Palmer 2019). All three RCTs reported iHOT-33, while two studies reported HOS ADL and Sport (Mansell 2019 and Palmer 2019). In a random effects meta-analysis, between-group differences in post-intervention scores were assessed using intention-to-treat analysis in each study. Results: All 3 RCTs reported PROs improvement from baseline to follow-up for both PT and surgery. The meta-analysis demonstrated greater improved iHOT-33 outcomes with surgery compared to PT with a mean relative difference of 11.3 (95% CI 1.86-20.73, p=0.014). The meta-analysis for HOS ADL and Sports (two RCTs) similarly demonstrated higher scores with surgery with a mean difference of 3.9 (95% CI -9.6-17.3, p=0.571) and 6.2 (95% CI -6.8-19.2, p=0.347), respectively, though without statistical significance. The quality of two RCTs was assessed as good with minimal bias (Griffin and Palmer). In the third RCT, an extremely high crossover rate may affect its validity (Mansell 2018, 70% crossover from PT to surgery). For instance, HOS ADL outcome based on treatment received, adjusting for Mansell’s crossover rate, favored surgery with a larger mean difference of 12.0 (95% CI 7.5-16.5, p<0.001) (compared to intention-to-treat difference of 3.9). Discussion: In patients with FAI, combined results of three RCTs demonstrate superior outcomes of surgery compared to PT. However, PT can result in improvements in some patients and does not appear to compromise surgical outcomes. Provided that the studies adjusted for certain patient characteristics, further research needs to identify patient characteristics that predict success of non-operative and operative treatment of FAI in specific patient subgroups. [Figure: see text]


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document