ACE Report Cover
Improved outcomes with active, cognitive-behavioural, or combined treatment for LBP
Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report
Language
Download Download Download
Download
Cite this Report Cite this Report Cite this Report
Cite
Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites
+ Favorites
Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report
Language
Download Download Download
Download
Cite this Report Cite this Report Cite this Report
Cite
Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites
+ Favorites
SPINE
Improved outcomes with active, cognitive-behavioural, or combined treatment for LBP .

OrthoEvidence Journal (OE Journal) - ACE Report

OE Journal. 2013;1(12):206 BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2006 Jan 20;7:5

227 patients with chronic non-specific low back pain (LBP) were randomized to undergo an active rehabilitation program focused on active physical treatment, cognitive-behavioural treatment, a combination of both, or placed on a waiting list (control group). The primary outcome were subjective variables in pain and function. Results indicated that the two intervention treatments and the combined treatment were effective compared to the control group. No significant clinical differences were seen between the individual interventions and the combination group.


Publication Funding Details +
Funding:
Non-Industry funded
Sponsor:
Zorgonderzoek Nederland/Medische Wetenschappen (ZonMw) and the Rehabilitation Centre Blixembosch
Conflicts:
None disclosed

Risk of Bias

7/10

Reporting Criteria

17/20

Fragility Index

N/A

Was the allocation sequence adequately generated?

Was allocation adequately concealed?

Blinding Treatment Providers: Was knowledge of the allocated interventions adequately prevented?

Blinding Outcome Assessors: Was knowledge of the allocated interventions adequately prevented?

Blinding Patients: Was knowledge of the allocated interventions adequately prevented?

Was loss to follow-up (missing outcome data) infrequent?

Are reports of the study free of suggestion of selective outcome reporting?

Were outcomes objective, patient-important and assessed in a manner to limit bias (ie. duplicate assessors, Independent assessors)?

Was the sample size sufficiently large to assure a balance of prognosis and sufficiently large number of outcome events?

Was investigator expertise/experience with both treatment and control techniques likely the same (ie.were criteria for surgeon participation/expertise provided)?

Yes = 1

Uncertain = 0.5

Not Relevant = 0

No = 0

The Reporting Criteria Assessment evaluates the transparency with which authors report the methodological and trial characteristics of the trial within the publication. The assessment is divided into five categories which are presented below.

4/4

Randomization

3/4

Outcome Measurements

2/4

Inclusion / Exclusion

4/4

Therapy Description

4/4

Statistics

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

The Fragility Index is a tool that aids in the interpretation of significant findings, providing a measure of strength for a result. The Fragility Index represents the number of consecutive events that need to be added to a dichotomous outcome to make the finding no longer significant. A small number represents a weaker finding and a large number represents a stronger finding.

Why was this study needed now?

Low back pain (LBP) is often treated based on three different models: the physical deconditioning model, the cognitive behavioural model and the biopsychosocial model. However, there is a lack of information between what type of treatment is most effective. This study examines the outcomes of treating patients with chronic LBP using physical active rehabilitation, cognitive-behavioural active rehabilitation, a combination of both, or none.

What was the principal research question?

What are the outcomes in pain and function when cognitive-behavioural active rehabilitation, physical active rehabilitation, a combination of both, or no treatment is administered in patients with chronic non-specific low back pain examined immediately post-intervention?

Study Characteristics +
Population:
227 patients with chronic non-specific low back pain. (223 patients treated) (Age: 18-65)
Intervention:
Active physical treatment (APT): Aerobic training and 3 dynamic static strengthening exercises. (Mean age: 42.68 +/-9.06 years) (n=53); Cognitive-behavioural treatment (CBT): Operant behavioural graded activity training and problem solving training. (Mean age: 42.52 +/-9.67 years) (n=58); Combined treatment (CT) (Mean age: 40.67 ± 10.14 years) (n=61) Intervention treatments were prescribed at 3 times a week for 10 weeks.
Comparison:
Waiting list control group (WL): Patients waited 10 weeks before treatment and were not allowed to undergo any therapeutic or diagnostic procedures during the waiting period. (Mean age: 40.55 +/-11.17 years) (n=51)
Outcomes:
Primary outcome: Low back pain associated with functional limitations (Roland Disability Questionnaire (RDQ)); Secondary outcomes: Questionnaires on pain, depression, global assessment, and treatment satisfaction; Physical performance (walking, standing up, reaching forward, stair climbing and lifting).
Methods:
RCT: Multiple centres (3)
Time:
10 weeks (Immediately post-intervention)
What were the important findings?
  • All 3 intervention treatments resulted in significant reductions in functional limitations, patient's main complaints, and pain intensity compared to the waiting list control group.
  • The 3 intervention treatment groups reported higher ratings in the outcomes of self-rated treatment effectiveness and satisfaction.
  • No clinically relevant differences were found between the CT and APT groups, or between CT and CBT groups.
  • APT and CT showed improvements in a number of physical performance tasks, while the CBT group did not.
What should I remember most?

The 3 intervention treatments (active physical treatment, cognitive-behavioural treatment, and combined treatment) demonstrated better outcomes when compared to the waiting list control group. No clinically significant differences were seen when the combined intervention treatments were compared to the individual intervention treatements.

How will this affect the care of my patients?

Undergoing active physical treatment, cognitive-behavioural treatment, or a combined treatment of both may provided improvements in functional limitations and pain intensity for patients suffering from chronic non-specific low back pain.

DISCLAIMER

This content found on this page is for informational purposes only and is not intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. If you require medical treatment, always seek the advice of your physician or go to your nearest emergency department. The opinions, beliefs, and viewpoints expressed by the individuals on the content found on this page do not reflect the opinions, beliefs, and viewpoints of OrthoEvidence.

0 of 4 monthly FREE articles unlocked
You've reached your limit of 4 free articles views this month

Access to OrthoEvidence for as little as $1.99 per week.

Stay connected with latest evidence. Cancel at any time.
  • Critical appraisals of the latest, high-impact randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews in orthopaedics
  • Access to OrthoEvidence podcast content, including collaborations with the Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, interviews with internationally recognized surgeons, and roundtable discussions on orthopaedic news and topics
  • Subscription to The Pulse, a twice-weekly evidence-based newsletter designed to help you make better clinical decisions
Upgrade
Welcome Back!
Forgot Password?
Start your FREE trial today!

Your account will be affiliated with
and includes free access to OrthoEvidence


OR
Forgot Password?

OR
Please check your email

If an account exists with the provided email address, a password reset email will be sent to you. If you don't see an email, please check your spam or junk folder.

For further assistance, contact our support team.

Please login to enable this feature

To access this feature, you must be logged into an active OrthoEvidence account. Please log in or create a FREE trial account.

Translate ACE Report

OrthoEvidence utilizes a third-party translation service to make content accessible in multiple languages. Please note that while every effort is made to ensure accuracy, translations may not always be perfect.

How to cite this ACE Report

OrthoEvidence. Improved outcomes with active, cognitive-behavioural, or combined treatment for LBP. OE Journal. 2013;1(12):206. Available from: https://myorthoevidence.com/AceReport/Show/improved-outcomes-with-active-cognitive-behavioural-or-combined-treatment-for-lbp

Copy Citation
Please login to enable this feature

To access this feature, you must be logged into an active OrthoEvidence account. Please log in or create a FREE trial account.

Premium Member Feature

To access this feature, you must be logged into a premium OrthoEvidence account.

Share this ACE Report