Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
PEER systematic review of randomized controlled trials: Management of chronic low back pain in primary care.
Kolber, Michael R; Ton, Joey; Thomas, Betsy; Kirkwood, Jessica; Moe, Samantha; Dugré, Nicolas; Chan, Karenn; Lindblad, Adrienne J; McCormack, James; Garrison, Scott; Allan, G Michael; Korownyk, Christina S; Craig, Rodger; Sept, Logan; Rouble, Andrew N; Perry, Danielle.
Afiliação
  • Kolber MR; Family physician and Professor in the Department of Family Medicine at the University of Alberta in Edmonton. mkolber@ualberta.ca.
  • Ton J; Pharmacist in Edmonton and Clinical Evidence Expert for the College of Family Physicians of Canada.
  • Thomas B; Pharmacist in Edmonton and Clinical Evidence Expert for the College of Family Physicians of Canada.
  • Kirkwood J; Family physician and Assistant Professor at the University of Alberta.
  • Moe S; Pharmacist and Clinical Evidence Expert at the College of Family Physicians of Canada in Mississauga, Ont.
  • Dugré N; Pharmacist at the CIUSSS du Nord-de-l'Ile-de-Montréal and Clinical Associate Professor in the Faculty of Pharmacy at the University of Montreal in Quebec.
  • Chan K; Care of the elderly physician and Assistant Professor in the Department of Family Medicine at the University of Alberta.
  • Lindblad AJ; Pharmacist, Clinical Evidence Expert Lead for the College of Family Physicians of Canada, and Associate Clinical Professor in the Department of Family Medicine at the University of Alberta.
  • McCormack J; Professor in the Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences at the University of British Columbia in Vancouver.
  • Garrison S; Family physician and Associate Professor in the Department of Family Medicine at the University of Alberta.
  • Allan GM; Family physician, Director of Programs and Practice Support at the College of Family Physicians of Canada, and Adjunct Professor in the Department of Family Medicine at the University of Alberta.
  • Korownyk CS; Family physician and Associate Professor in the Department of Family Medicine at the University of Alberta.
  • Craig R; Medical students at the University of Alberta.
  • Sept L; Medical students at the University of Alberta.
  • Rouble AN; Family physician in Toronto, Ont.
  • Perry D; Nurse in Edmonton and Clinical Evidence Expert for the College of Family Physicians of Canada.
Can Fam Physician ; 67(1): e20-e30, 2021 01.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33483410
ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE:

To determine the proportion of chronic low back pain patients who achieve a clinically meaningful response from different pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatments. DATA SOURCES MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and gray literature search. STUDY SELECTION Published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that reported a responder analysis of adults with chronic low back pain treated with any of the following 15

interventions:

oral or topical nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), exercise, acupuncture, spinal manipulation therapy, corticosteroid injections, acetaminophen, oral opioids, anticonvulsants, tricyclic antidepressants, serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, cannabinoids, oral muscle relaxants, or topical rubefacients.

SYNTHESIS:

A total of 63 RCTs were included. There was moderate certainty that exercise (risk ratio [RR] of 1.71; 95% CI 1.37 to 2.15; number needed to treat [NNT] of 7), oral NSAIDs (RR = 1.44; 95% CI 1.17 to 1.78; NNT = 6), and SNRIs (duloxetine; RR = 1.25; 95% CI 1.13 to 1.38; NNT = 10) provide clinically meaningful benefits to patients with chronic low back pain. Exercise was the only intervention with sustained benefit (up to 48 weeks). There was low certainty that spinal manipulation therapy and topical rubefacients benefit patients. The benefit of acupuncture disappeared in higher-quality, longer (> 4 weeks) trials. Very low-quality evidence demonstrated that corticosteroid injections are ineffective. Patients treated with opioids had a greater likelihood of discontinuing treatment owing to an adverse event (number needed to harm of 5) than continuing treatment to derive any clinically meaningful benefit (NNT = 16), while those treated with SNRIs (duloxetine) had a similar likelihood of continuing treatment to attain benefit (NNT = 10) as those discontinuing the medication owing to an adverse event (number need to harm of 11). One trial each of anticonvulsants and topical NSAIDs found similar benefit to that of placebo. No RCTs of acetaminophen, cannabinoids, muscle relaxants, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, or tricyclic antidepressants met the inclusion criteria.

CONCLUSION:

Exercise, oral NSAIDs, and SNRIs (duloxetine) provide a clinically meaningful reduction in pain, with exercise being the only intervention that demonstrated sustained benefit after the intervention ended. Future high-quality trials that report responder analyses are required to provide a better understanding of the benefits and harms of interventions for patients with chronic low back pain.
Assuntos

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Dor Lombar Tipo de estudo: Clinical_trials / Systematic_reviews Limite: Adult / Humans Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2021 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Dor Lombar Tipo de estudo: Clinical_trials / Systematic_reviews Limite: Adult / Humans Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2021 Tipo de documento: Article