Cargando…

Back schools for the treatment of chronic low back pain: possibility of benefit but no convincing evidence after 47 years of research—systematic review and meta-analysis

Back schools are interventions that comprise exercise and education components. We aimed to systematically review the randomized controlled trial evidence on back schools for the treatment of chronic low back pain. By searching MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central as well as bibliographies, we iden...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Straube, Sebastian, Harden, Markus, Schröder, Heiko, Arendacka, Barbora, Fan, Xiangning, Moore, R. Andrew, Friede, Tim
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5028160/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27257858
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/j.pain.0000000000000640
_version_ 1782454340140662784
author Straube, Sebastian
Harden, Markus
Schröder, Heiko
Arendacka, Barbora
Fan, Xiangning
Moore, R. Andrew
Friede, Tim
author_facet Straube, Sebastian
Harden, Markus
Schröder, Heiko
Arendacka, Barbora
Fan, Xiangning
Moore, R. Andrew
Friede, Tim
author_sort Straube, Sebastian
collection PubMed
description Back schools are interventions that comprise exercise and education components. We aimed to systematically review the randomized controlled trial evidence on back schools for the treatment of chronic low back pain. By searching MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central as well as bibliographies, we identified 31 studies for inclusion in our systematic review and 5 of these for inclusion in meta-analyses. Meta-analyses for pain scores and functional outcomes revealed statistical superiority of back schools vs no intervention for some comparisons but not others. No meta-analysis was feasible for the comparison of back schools vs other active treatments. Adverse events were poorly reported so that no reliable conclusions regarding the safety of back schools can be drawn, although some limited reassurance in this regard may be derived from the fact that few adverse events and no serious adverse events were reported in the back school groups in the studies that did report on safety. Overall, the evidence base for the use of back schools to treat chronic low back pain is weak; in nearly a half-century since back schools were first trialled, no unequivocal evidence of benefit has emerged.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5028160
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Wolters Kluwer
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-50281602016-10-04 Back schools for the treatment of chronic low back pain: possibility of benefit but no convincing evidence after 47 years of research—systematic review and meta-analysis Straube, Sebastian Harden, Markus Schröder, Heiko Arendacka, Barbora Fan, Xiangning Moore, R. Andrew Friede, Tim Pain Comprehensive Review Back schools are interventions that comprise exercise and education components. We aimed to systematically review the randomized controlled trial evidence on back schools for the treatment of chronic low back pain. By searching MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central as well as bibliographies, we identified 31 studies for inclusion in our systematic review and 5 of these for inclusion in meta-analyses. Meta-analyses for pain scores and functional outcomes revealed statistical superiority of back schools vs no intervention for some comparisons but not others. No meta-analysis was feasible for the comparison of back schools vs other active treatments. Adverse events were poorly reported so that no reliable conclusions regarding the safety of back schools can be drawn, although some limited reassurance in this regard may be derived from the fact that few adverse events and no serious adverse events were reported in the back school groups in the studies that did report on safety. Overall, the evidence base for the use of back schools to treat chronic low back pain is weak; in nearly a half-century since back schools were first trialled, no unequivocal evidence of benefit has emerged. Wolters Kluwer 2016-06-01 2016-10 /pmc/articles/PMC5028160/ /pubmed/27257858 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/j.pain.0000000000000640 Text en © 2016 International Association for the Study of Pain This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License 4.0 (CC BY-NC-ND) (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) , which permits downloading and sharing the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially.
spellingShingle Comprehensive Review
Straube, Sebastian
Harden, Markus
Schröder, Heiko
Arendacka, Barbora
Fan, Xiangning
Moore, R. Andrew
Friede, Tim
Back schools for the treatment of chronic low back pain: possibility of benefit but no convincing evidence after 47 years of research—systematic review and meta-analysis
title Back schools for the treatment of chronic low back pain: possibility of benefit but no convincing evidence after 47 years of research—systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full Back schools for the treatment of chronic low back pain: possibility of benefit but no convincing evidence after 47 years of research—systematic review and meta-analysis
title_fullStr Back schools for the treatment of chronic low back pain: possibility of benefit but no convincing evidence after 47 years of research—systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Back schools for the treatment of chronic low back pain: possibility of benefit but no convincing evidence after 47 years of research—systematic review and meta-analysis
title_short Back schools for the treatment of chronic low back pain: possibility of benefit but no convincing evidence after 47 years of research—systematic review and meta-analysis
title_sort back schools for the treatment of chronic low back pain: possibility of benefit but no convincing evidence after 47 years of research—systematic review and meta-analysis
topic Comprehensive Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5028160/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27257858
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/j.pain.0000000000000640
work_keys_str_mv AT straubesebastian backschoolsforthetreatmentofchroniclowbackpainpossibilityofbenefitbutnoconvincingevidenceafter47yearsofresearchsystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT hardenmarkus backschoolsforthetreatmentofchroniclowbackpainpossibilityofbenefitbutnoconvincingevidenceafter47yearsofresearchsystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT schroderheiko backschoolsforthetreatmentofchroniclowbackpainpossibilityofbenefitbutnoconvincingevidenceafter47yearsofresearchsystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT arendackabarbora backschoolsforthetreatmentofchroniclowbackpainpossibilityofbenefitbutnoconvincingevidenceafter47yearsofresearchsystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT fanxiangning backschoolsforthetreatmentofchroniclowbackpainpossibilityofbenefitbutnoconvincingevidenceafter47yearsofresearchsystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT moorerandrew backschoolsforthetreatmentofchroniclowbackpainpossibilityofbenefitbutnoconvincingevidenceafter47yearsofresearchsystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT friedetim backschoolsforthetreatmentofchroniclowbackpainpossibilityofbenefitbutnoconvincingevidenceafter47yearsofresearchsystematicreviewandmetaanalysis