ACE Report Cover
Duloxetine comparable to current pain relief methods in treating chronic low back pain
Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report
Langue
Download Download Download
Télécharger
Cite this Report Cite this Report Cite this Report
Citer
Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites
+ Favoris
Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report
Langue
Download Download Download
Télécharger
Cite this Report Cite this Report Cite this Report
Citer
Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites
+ Favoris

SPINE

Efficacy of duloxetine versus alternative oral therapies: an indirect comparison of randomised clinical trials in chronic low back pain
Verified
This report has been verified by one or more authors of the original publication.

OrthoEvidence Journal (OE Journal) - ACE Report

OE Journal. 2014;2(1):23 Eur Spine J. 2013 Sep;22(9):1996-2009

Fifteen randomized clinical trials were included in this meta-analysis to compare duloxetine to a variety of other pain medications in the treatment of chronic low back pain. Comparisons between duloxetine and antidepressants, cox-2 inhibitors, non-scheduled opioids, scheduled opioids and other drugs suggested that scheduled opioids were more effective than duloxetine; however, the effect size was minimal and difference was lost when repeated using a random effects model. Before any definitive conclusions can be made regarding duloxetine as an alternative treatment for chronic low back pain, further clinical trials providing direct comparisons are required.


Détails du financement de la publication +
Financement:
Industry funded
Sponsor:
Eli Lilly and Company
Conflits:
Other

Risque de partialité

9,5/10

Critères de déclaration

18/20

Indice de fragilité

N/A

Were the search methods used to find evidence (original research) on the primary question or questions stated?

Was the search for evidence reasonably comprehensive?

Were the criteria used for deciding which studies to include in the overview reported?

Was the bias in the selection of studies avoided?

Were the criteria used for assessing the validity of the included studies reported?

Was the validity of all of the studies referred to in the text assessed with use of appropriate criteria (either in selecting the studies for inclusion or in analyzing the studies that were cited)?

Were the methods used to combine the findings of the relevant studies (to reach a conclusion) reported?

Were the findings of the relevant studies combined appropriately relative to the primary question that the overview addresses?

Were the conclusions made by the author or authors supported by the data and or analysis reported in the overview?

How would you rate the scientific quality of this evidence?

Oui = 1

Incertain = 0,5

Non pertinent = 0

Non = 0

L'évaluation des critères de rapport permet d'évaluer la transparence avec laquelle les auteurs rapportent les caractéristiques méthodologiques et les caractéristiques de l'essai dans la publication. L'évaluation est divisée en cinq catégories qui sont présentées ci-dessous.

4/4

Introduction

4/4

Accessing Data

3/4

Analysing Data

4/4

Results

3/4

Discussion

Detsky AS, Naylor CD, O'Rourke K, McGeer AJ, L'Abbé KA. J Clin Epidemiol. 1992;45:255-65

L'indice de fragilité est un outil qui aide à l'interprétation des résultats significatifs, en fournissant une mesure de la force d'un résultat. L'indice de fragilité représente le nombre d'événements consécutifs qui doivent être ajoutés à un résultat dichotomique pour que le résultat ne soit plus significatif. Un petit nombre représente un résultat plus faible et un grand nombre un résultat plus fort.

Pourquoi cette étude était-elle nécessaire maintenant ?

Chronic low back pain is a common musculoskeletal disorder that contributes to growing disability rates, and results in a substantial economic burden on the healthcare system. Back pain can be caused by a number of factors, making it very difficult to determine an appropriate course of treatment. The majority of treatment strategies revolve around symptom relief including opioids, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, anticonvulsants and antidepressants. Duloxetine regulates the descending pain inhibitory pathways by inhibiting serotonin epinephrine reuptake. This meta-analysis was necessary to make an indirect comparison of duloxetine and oral pharmacological therapies in the treatment of low back pain.

Quelle était la principale question de recherche ?

Is duloxetine effective in relieving chronic low back pain compared to opioids, antidepressants, cox-2 inhibitors, and other drugs?

Caractéristiques de l'étude +
Source des données:
A search of the following of the databases was conducted from 1966 to January 2011: PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane and Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (CRD).
Termes de l'index:
['Low back pain' OR ('low' AND 'back' AND 'pain' OR 'low back pain'] AND ['Drug therapy' OR ('drug' AND 'therapy' OR 'drug therapy' OR 'drug therapy' OR ('drug' AND 'therapy')] AND ['Clinical trial' OR 'clinical trials as topic' OR 'clinical trials']
Sélection de l'étude:
Studies were screened by two independent authors and any discrepancies were mediated by a third reviewer. The fifteen included studies were randomized, written in English, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of patients over 18 years old suffering from chronic low back pain for at least 3 months prior to the study and were. Exclusion criteria for studies included patients 18 years or younger, acute or pain for less than 3 months prior to study, or only one treatment arm was allocated to drug therapy.
Extraction des données:
Outcomes, study design synopsis, comparator therapies, dosing regimen, titration schedule, duration of treatment, baseline characteristics, and efficacy outcomes were summarized in an Excel spreadsheet by two independent authors and discrepancies were resolved by a third reviewer.
Synthèse des données:
Fixed and random effects normal models provided estimates of the mean difference in treatment effect. Pooled estimates of treatment difference in three-arm trials were used to calculate Cochrane Q tests, and I^2 statistics to test and quantify between-study heterogeneity. Forest plots were generated to visually assess the extent of heterogeneity. Small effect size was defined as standardized mean difference (SMD) from 0.2-0.5, moderate effect size as SMD from 0.5-0.8, and large effect size as SMD greater than 0.8.

Quels sont les résultats importants ?

  • Standardized mean differences were highest in studies assessing scheduled opioid treatment and in a the meta-analysis of 15 studies, the fixed effects model found scheduled opioids to be more effective than duloxetine; however, the effect size presented a less than small magnitude of effect and the difference was not found when assessed under a random effects model. Heterogeneity comparing non-scheduled opioids was 75%, scheduled opioids had a heterogeneity of 79% and all other drug classes had low heterogeneity.
  • Meta-analysis using a fixed effects model found that, with the exception of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and glucosamine, all drug classes were more effective than placebo.
  • Meta-analysis using a random effects model for indirect comparison between drug treatments resulted in antidepressants (SMD=0.28, 95%CI -0.33, 0.89), cox-2 inhibitors (SMD=-0.05, 95%CI -0.40, 0.30), non-scheduled opioids (SMD=-0.13, 95%CI -0.47, 0.20), scheduled opioids (SMD=-0.24, 95%CI -0.55, 0.05) and other drugs (SMD=0.22, 95%CI -0.29, 0.74) being similar to duloxetine (Between study variance = 0.04).
  • Pain duration was found to be a covariate according to a sensitivity analysis (SD=0.08, 95%CI 0.06, 0.38), with lower treatment differences observed for patients who had suffered pain for over 6 months.
De quoi dois-je me souvenir en priorité ?

Duloxetine was found to be comparable to antidepressants, Cox-2 inhibitors, non-scheduled opioids and other drugs. Scheduled opioids were found to be more effective in the fixed effects model, however this benefit was not observed in the random effects model.

Comment cela affectera-t-il les soins prodigués à mes patients ?

Duloxentine did not prove to be more beneficial to patients with chronic low back than other drugs that are currently used. Limitations include a low number of studies for each comparison and a variety of outcome measures used in the studies. Also, these results are based on an indirect comparison, indicating the need for future research that make head-to-head comparisons of duloxetine with other drug treatments.

AVIS DE NON-RESPONSABILITÉ

Le contenu de cette page est fourni à titre d'information uniquement et n'est pas destiné à remplacer un avis médical, un diagnostic ou un traitement professionnel. Si vous avez besoin d'un traitement médical, demandez toujours l'avis de votre médecin ou rendez-vous au service des urgences le plus proche. Les opinions, croyances et points de vue exprimés par les individus sur le contenu de cette page ne reflètent pas les opinions, croyances et points de vue d'OrthoEvidence.

0 de 4 articles mensuels GRATUITS débloqués
Vous avez atteint votre limite de 4 vues d'articles gratuits ce mois-ci

Accédez à OrthoEvidence pour seulement 1,99 $ par semaine.

Restez informé des dernières données. Annulez à tout moment.
  • Évaluations critiques des derniers essais contrôlés randomisés à fort impact et des revues systématiques en orthopédie.
  • Accès au contenu des podcasts OrthoEvidence, y compris les collaborations avec le Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, les entretiens avec des chirurgiens de renommée internationale et les tables rondes sur l'actualité et les sujets orthopédiques.
  • Abonnement à The Pulse, une lettre d'information bihebdomadaire fondée sur des données probantes, conçue pour vous aider à prendre de meilleures décisions cliniques.
Upgrade
Close Dialog
Bienvenue à nouveau !
Vous avez oublié votre mot de passe ?
Commencez votre essai GRATUIT dès aujourd'hui !

Votre compte sera affilié à
et inclut un accès gratuit à OrthoEvidence.


OU
Vous avez oublié votre mot de passe ?

OU
Veuillez vérifier votre adresse électronique

Si un compte existe avec l'adresse e-mail fournie, un e-mail de réinitialisation du mot de passe vous sera envoyé. Si vous ne voyez pas d'e-mail, veuillez vérifier votre dossier de spam ou de courrier indésirable.

Pour plus d'assistance, contactez notre équipe d'assistance.

Veuillez vous connecter pour activer cette fonction

Pour accéder à cette fonctionnalité, vous devez être connecté à un compte OrthoEvidence actif. Veuillez vous connecter ou créer un compte d'essai GRATUIT.

Traduire le rapport ACE

OrthoEvidence utilise un service de traduction tiers pour rendre le contenu accessible dans plusieurs langues. Veuillez noter que même si tous les efforts sont faits pour assurer l'exactitude, les traductions ne sont pas toujours parfaites.

Comment citer ce document ACE Report

OrthoEvidence. Duloxetine comparable to current pain relief methods in treating chronic low back pain. OE Journal. 2014;2(1):23. Available from: https://myorthoevidence.com/AceReport/Show/duloxetine-comparable-to-current-pain-relief-methods-in-treating-chronic-low-back-pain

Copier la citation
Veuillez vous connecter pour activer cette fonction

Pour accéder à cette fonctionnalité, vous devez être connecté à un compte OrthoEvidence actif. Veuillez vous connecter ou créer un compte d'essai GRATUIT.

Fonctionnalité Membre Premium

Pour accéder à cette fonctionnalité, vous devez être connecté à un compte Premium OrthoEvidence.

Partager ACE Report