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
言語
Download Download Download
ダウンロード
Cite this Report Cite this Report Cite this Report
引用
Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites
+ お気に入り
Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report
言語
Download Download Download
ダウンロード
Cite this Report Cite this Report Cite this Report
引用
Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites
+ お気に入り

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.


出版資金提供の詳細 +
資金提供:
Industry funded
スポンサー:
Eli Lilly and Company
コンフリクト:
Other

バイアスのリスク

9.5/10

報告基準

18/20

脆弱性指数

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?

はい = 1

不確実=0.5

無関係 = 0

いいえ = 0

報告基準評価では、著者が出版物内で試験の方法論的特徴や試験特性を報告する際の透明性を評価します。評価は以下の5つのカテゴリーに分類されます。

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

Fragility Indexは、重要な所見の解釈を助けるツールで、結果の強さの尺度を提供します。Fragility Indexは、その所見が有意でなくなるために、二項対立の結果に追加する必要がある連続した事象の数を表します。数値が小さいほど弱い所見を表し、数値が大きいほど強い所見を表します。

なぜ今この研究が必要なのですか?

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.

主な研究課題は何ですか?

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

研究の特徴 +
データソース:
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).
索引用語:
['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']
研究の選択:
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.
データ抽出:
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.
データ統合:
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.

重要な知見は?

  • 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.
最も覚えておくべきことは?

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.

それが私の患者ケアにどのように影響するか?

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.

免責事項

このページに記載されている内容は、情報提供のみを目的としたものであり、専門的な医療アドバイス、診断、治療の代わりとなるものではありません。治療が必要な場合は、必ず医師の診断を仰ぐか、最寄りの救急外来を受診してください。このページに記載されている内容に関して個人が表明した意見、信念、見解は、OrthoEvidenceの意見、信念、見解を反映するものではありません。

0の4 月間無料記事のロック解除
今月の無料記事閲覧数が4件に達しました。

週1.99ドルからOrthoEvidenceにアクセスできます。

最新のエビデンスにアクセスしてください。いつでもキャンセルできます。
  • 整形外科における最新のインパクトのあるランダム化比較試験とシステマティックレビューの批判的評価
  • Journal of Bone and Joint Surgeryとのコラボレーション、国際的に著名な外科医へのインタビュー、整形外科ニュースやトピックに関する座談会など、OrthoEvidenceポッドキャストコンテンツへのアクセス
  • 週2回発行されるエビデンスに基づくニュースレター、The Pulseの購読。
Upgrade
Close Dialog
おかえりなさい
パスワードをお忘れですか?
今すぐ無料トライアルを開始

あなたのアカウントは
OrthoEvidenceへの無料アクセスが含まれます。


または
パスワードをお忘れですか?

または
Eメールをご確認ください

入力されたメールアドレスにアカウントが存在する場合、パスワードリセットのメールが送信されます。メールが届かない場合は、迷惑メールフォルダをご確認ください。

その他のサポート サポートチームまでご連絡ください。.

この機能を有効にするにはログインしてください

この機能にアクセスするには、有効なOrthoEvidenceアカウントにログインする必要があります。ログインするか、無料トライアルアカウントを作成してください。

ACEレポートを翻訳

OrthoEvidenceは、多言語でコンテンツにアクセスできるようにするため、第三者の翻訳サービスを利用しています。正確性を確保するためにあらゆる努力をしていますが、翻訳が必ずしも完璧ではない可能性があることにご注意ください。

引用方法 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

引用のコピー
この機能を有効にするにはログインしてください

この機能にアクセスするには、有効なOrthoEvidenceアカウントにログインする必要があります。ログインするか、無料トライアルアカウントを作成してください。

プレミアム会員機能

この機能にアクセスするには、OrthoEvidenceのプレミアムアカウントにログインする必要があります。

共有 ACE Report