Meta-Analysis

Authors: Robson Massi Bastos, Claudia Regina Moya, Rodrigo Antunes de Vasconcelos...

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review the effects of treatment-based classification (TBC) in patients with specific and nonspecific acute, subacute and chronic low back pain.

METHODS

The following databases were searched: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Global Health, CENTRAL, Web of Science, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, PEDro and WHO from inception up to December 2021. We used the PEDro scale, the TIDieR checklist and the GRADE approach to evaluate the risk of bias, quality on reporting and the certainty of the evidence, respectively.

RESULTS

Twenty-three trials (pooled n = 2,649) met the inclusion criteria. We have identified a total of 22 comparisons and 134 estimates of treatment effects. There was a very large heterogeneity with regards to the comparison groups. Most of individual trials had low risk of bias with a mean score of 6.8 (SD = 1.3) on a 0-10 scale. The certainty of evidence for most comparisons was low, which indicates that more high quality and robust trials are needed. We were able to pool the data using a meta-analysis approach for only two comparisons (TBC versus mobility exercises in patients with acute low back pain and traction for patients with sciatica). In general, the TBC approach seems to be useful for patients with acute low back pain, sciatica and with spinal stenosis. We strongly suggest readers to carefully read our summary of findings table for further details on each comparison.

CONCLUSION

The TBC approach seems to be useful for patients with acute low back pain, sciatica and with spinal stenosis.

Topics: Acute Pain; Exercise Therapy; Humans; Low Back Pain; Sciatica; Spinal Stenosis

PubMed: 35067217
DOI: 10.1080/10669817.2021.2024677

Review

Authors: Raymond Wjg Ostelo

Topics: Humans; Low Back Pain; Physical Therapy Modalities; Sciatica

PubMed: 32291226
DOI: 10.1016/j.jphys.2020.03.005

Meta-Analysis

Authors: Chang Liu, Giovanni E Ferreira, Christina Abdel Shaheed...

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effectiveness and safety of surgery compared with non-surgical treatment for sciatica.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the World Health Organisation International Clinical Trials Registry Platform from database inception to June 2022.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES

Randomised controlled trials comparing any surgical treatment with non-surgical treatment, epidural steroid injections, or placebo or sham surgery, in people with sciatica of any duration due to lumbar disc herniation (diagnosed by radiological imaging).

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Two independent reviewers extracted data. Leg pain and disability were the primary outcomes. Adverse events, back pain, quality of life, and satisfaction with treatment were the secondary outcomes. Pain and disability scores were converted to a scale of 0 (no pain or disability) to 100 (worst pain or disability). Data were pooled using a random effects model. Risk of bias was assessed with the Cochrane Collaboration's tool and certainty of evidence with the grading of recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE) framework. Follow-up times were into immediate term (≤six weeks), short term (>six weeks and ≤three months), medium term (>three and <12 months), and long term (at 12 months).

RESULTS

24 trials were included, half of these investigated the effectiveness of discectomy compared with non-surgical treatment or epidural steroid injections (1711 participants). Very low to low certainty evidence showed that discectomy, compared with non-surgical treatment, reduced leg pain: the effect size was moderate at immediate term (mean difference -12.1 (95% confidence interval -23.6 to -0.5)) and short term (-11.7 (-18.6 to -4.7)), and small at medium term (-6.5 (-11.0 to -2.1)). Negligible effects were noted at long term (-2.3 (-4.5 to -0.2)). For disability, small, negligible, or no effects were found. A similar effect on leg pain was found when comparing discectomy with epidural steroid injections. For disability, a moderate effect was found at short term, but no effect was observed at medium and long term. The risk of any adverse events was similar between discectomy and non-surgical treatment (risk ratio 1.34 (95% confidence interval 0.91 to 1.98)).

CONCLUSION

Very low to low certainty evidence suggests that discectomy was superior to non-surgical treatment or epidural steroid injections in reducing leg pain and disability in people with sciatica with a surgical indication, but the benefits declined over time. Discectomy might be an option for people with sciatica who feel that the rapid relief offered by discectomy outweighs the risks and costs associated with surgery.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42021269997.

Topics: Humans; Sciatica; Quality of Life; Back Pain; Intervertebral Disc Displacement; Steroids; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic

PubMed: 37076169
DOI: 10.1136/bmj-2022-070730

Randomized Controlled Trial

Authors: Musa S Danazumi, Bashir Bello, Abdulsalam M Yakasai...

CONTEXT

Evidence has shown that spinal mobilization with leg movement (SMWLM) and progressive inhibition of neuromuscular structures (PINS) are individually effective in the management of lumbar radiculopathy. However, previous evidence reported data for only a short-term study period and did not investigate the effect of the combined manual therapy techniques.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the combined effects of two manual therapy techniques (SMWLM and PINS) with the individual techniques alone (SMWLM or PINS) in the management of individuals with lumbar radiculopathy.

METHODS

A total of 60 patients diagnosed with unilateral lumbar radiculopathy secondary to disc herniation were randomly allocated into three groups: 20 participants each in the SMWLM, PINS, and combined SMWLM + PINS groups. Each group attended two treatments per week for 30 min each, for three months. Participants were assessed at baseline, immediately posttreatment, and then at three, six, and nine months follow-up using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Rolland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ), and Sciatica Bothersomeness Index (SBI).

RESULTS

Between-groups analyses using a two-way repeated-measures analysis of variance indicated significant interactions between groups and follow-up times for all outcomes (p=0.001). Participants receiving combined SMWLM + PINS treatment experienced greater improvement in leg pain, back pain, disability, and sciatica at all timelines (immediately posttreatment, and three, six, and nine months follow-up) than the participants receiving SMWLM or PINS alone (p<0.05). However, participants receiving SMWLM alone showed better improvement than the participants receiving PINS alone at all timelines (p<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

A combined SMWLM + PINS treatment protocol showed greater improvement than the individual techniques alone in the management of individuals with LR in this study.

Topics: Humans; Intervertebral Disc Displacement; Lumbar Vertebrae; Musculoskeletal Manipulations; Radiculopathy; Sciatica

PubMed: 33705612
DOI: 10.1515/jom-2020-0261

Review

Authors: B W Koes, M W van Tulder, W C Peul...

Topics: Diagnostic Imaging; Evidence-Based Medicine; Forecasting; Humans; Practice Guidelines as Topic; Prognosis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Sciatica

PubMed: 17585160
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.39223.428495.BE

Meta-Analysis Review

Authors: Lucy Dove, Gillian Jones, Lee Anne Kelsey...

PURPOSE

Physiotherapy interventions are prescribed as first-line treatment for people with sciatica; however, their effectiveness remains controversial. The purpose of this systematic review was to establish the short-, medium- and long-term effectiveness of physiotherapy interventions compared to control interventions for people with clinically diagnosed sciatica.

METHODS

This systematic review was registered on PROSPERO CRD42018103900. Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), CINAHL (EBSCO), Embase, PEDro, PubMed, Scopus and grey literature were searched from inception to January 2021 without language restrictions. Inclusion criteria were randomised controlled trials evaluating physiotherapy interventions compared to a control intervention in people with clinical or imaging diagnosis of sciatica. Primary outcome measures were pain and disability. Study selection and data extraction were performed by two independent reviewers with consensus reached by discussion or third-party arbitration if required. Risk of bias was assessed independently by two reviewers using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool with third-party consensus if required. Meta-analyses and sensitivity analyses were performed with random effects models using Revman v5.4. Subgroup analyses were undertaken to examine the effectiveness of physiotherapy interventions compared to minimal (e.g. advice only) or substantial control interventions (e.g. surgery).

RESULTS

Three thousand nine hundred and fifty eight records were identified, of which 18 trials were included, with a total number of 2699 participants. All trials had a high or unclear risk of bias. Meta-analysis of trials for the outcome of pain showed no difference in the short (SMD - 0.34 [95%CI - 1.05, 0.37] p = 0.34, I = 98%), medium (SMD 0.15 [95%CI - 0.09, 0.38], p = 0.22, I= 80%) or long term (SMD 0.09 [95%CI - 0.18, 0.36], p = 0.51, I= 82%). For disability there was no difference in the short (SMD - 0.00 [95%CI - 0.36, 0.35], p = 0.98, I = 92%, medium (SMD 0.25 [95%CI - 0.04, 0.55] p = 0.09, I = 87%), or long term (SMD 0.26 [95%CI - 0.16, 0.68] p = 0.22, I = 92%) between physiotherapy and control interventions. Subgroup analysis of studies comparing physiotherapy with minimal intervention favoured physiotherapy for pain at the long-term time points. Large confidence intervals and high heterogeneity indicate substantial uncertainly surrounding these estimates. Many trials evaluating physiotherapy intervention compared to substantial intervention did not use contemporary physiotherapy interventions.

CONCLUSION

Based on currently available, mostly high risk of bias and highly heterogeneous data, there is inadequate evidence to make clinical recommendations on the effectiveness of physiotherapy interventions for people with clinically diagnosed sciatica. Future studies should aim to reduce clinical heterogeneity and to use contemporary physiotherapy interventions.

Topics: Humans; Sciatica; Physical Therapy Modalities

PubMed: 36580149
DOI: 10.1007/s00586-022-07356-y

Meta-Analysis

Authors: María Soledad Giménez-Campos, Pedro Pimenta-Fermisson-Ramos, Jose Israel Díaz-Cambronero...

AIM

This SR aims to assess the effectiveness of pregabalin and gabapentin on pain and disability caused by acute sciatica and the adverse events associated with their clinical use.

DESIGN

Systematic review.

DATABASES

Electronic databases of Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Clinical Trials.gov were searched from their inception until March 1st of 2021.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized trials (RCT) with adults>18 years old with acute sciatica for a minimum of 1 week and a maximum of 1 year (at least moderate pain).

DATA TREATMENT

The outcomes were pain, disability and adverse events. Data was summarized using odds ratio and mean difference. GRADE was used to calculate the level of evidence.

RESULTS

Eight RCT involving 747 participants were included. The effect of pregabalin was assessed in 3 RCT and in one three-arm trial (pregabalin vs limaprost vs a combination of limaprost and pregabalin). Two trials assessed the effect of gabapentin compared with placebo and one compared with tramadol. One study assessed the effect of gabapentin vs pregabalin in a crossover head-to-head trial. A statistically significant improvement on leg pain at 2 weeks and leg pain with movement at 3 and 4 months was found in a RCT comparing gabapentin with placebo. There were no statistically differences on the remaining time periods assessed for leg pain, low back pain and functional disability.

CONCLUSIONS

This SR provides clear evidence for lack of effectiveness of pregabalin and gabapentin for sciatica pain management. In view of this, its routine clinical use cannot be supported.

Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Analgesics; Gabapentin; Humans; Low Back Pain; Pregabalin; Sciatica

PubMed: 34637958
DOI: 10.1016/j.aprim.2021.102144

Review

Authors: Kevork Hopayian, Fujian Song, Ricardo Riera...

Piriformis syndrome, sciatica caused by compression of the sciatic nerve by the piriformis muscle, has been described for over 70 years; yet, it remains controversial. The literature consists mainly of case series and narrative reviews. The objectives of the study were: first, to make the best use of existing evidence to estimate the frequencies of clinical features in patients reported to have PS; second, to identify future research questions. A systematic review was conducted of any study type that reported extractable data relevant to diagnosis. The search included all studies up to 1 March 2008 in four databases: AMED, CINAHL, Embase and Medline. Screening, data extraction and analysis were all performed independently by two reviewers. A total of 55 studies were included: 51 individual and 3 aggregated data studies, and 1 combined study. The most common features found were: buttock pain, external tenderness over the greater sciatic notch, aggravation of the pain through sitting and augmentation of the pain with manoeuvres that increase piriformis muscle tension. Future research could start with comparing the frequencies of these features in sciatica patients with and without disc herniation or spinal stenosis.

Topics: Humans; Pain; Piriformis Muscle Syndrome; Sciatica

PubMed: 20596735
DOI: 10.1007/s00586-010-1504-9

Review

Authors: Jo Jordan, Kika Konstantinou, John O'Dowd...

INTRODUCTION

Herniated lumbar disc is a displacement of disc material (nucleus pulposus or annulus fibrosis) beyond the intervertebral disc space. The highest prevalence is among people aged 30-50 years, with a male to female ratio of 2:1. There is little evidence to suggest that drug treatments are effective in treating herniated disc.

METHODS AND OUTCOMES

We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical questions: What are the effects of drug treatments, non-drug treatments, and surgery for herniated lumbar disc? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to July 2008 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically; please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).

RESULTS

We found 49 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

In this systematic review, we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: acupuncture, advice to stay active, analgesics, antidepressants, bed rest, corticosteroids (epidural injections), cytokine inhibitors (infliximab), discectomy (automated percutaneous, laser, microdisectomy, standard), exercise therapy, heat, ice, massage, muscle relaxants, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), percutaneous disc decompression, spinal manipulation, and traction.

Topics: Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Diskectomy; Humans; Intervertebral Disc Displacement; Manipulation, Spinal; Sciatica; Treatment Outcome

PubMed: 19445754
DOI: No ID Found

Review

Authors: Lori A Boyajian-O'Neill, Rance L McClain, Michele K Coleman...

Piriformis syndrome is a neuromuscular condition characterized by hip and buttock pain. This syndrome is often overlooked in clinical settings because its presentation may be similar to that of lumbar radiculopathy, primary sacral dysfunction, or innominate dysfunction. The ability to recognize piriformis syndrome requires an understanding of the structure and function of the piriformis muscle and its relationship to the sciatic nerve. The authors review the anatomic and clinical features of this condition, summarizing the osteopathic medical approach to diagnosis and management. A holistic approach to diagnosis requires a thorough neurologic history and physical assessment of the patient based on the pathologic characteristics of piriformis syndrome. The authors note that several nonpharmacologic therapies, including osteopathic manipulative treatment, can be used alone or in conjunction with pharmacotherapeutic options in the management of piriformis syndrome.

Topics: Adult; Analgesics; Biomechanical Phenomena; Buttocks; Diagnosis, Differential; Female; Hip; Humans; Male; Manipulation, Osteopathic; Middle Aged; Muscle, Skeletal; Osteopathic Medicine; Physical Examination; Physical Therapy Modalities; Sciatica; Syndrome

PubMed: 19011229
DOI: 10.7556/jaoa.2008.108.11.657