The updated cochrane review of bed rest for low back pain and sciatica
A systematic review within the Cochrane Collaboration Back Review Group. To report the main results from the updated version of the Cochrane Review on bed rest for low back pain. There has been a growing amount of evidence showing that bed rest is not beneficial for people with low back pain. Howeve...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Spine (Philadelphia, Pa. 1976) Pa. 1976), 2005-03, Vol.30 (5), p.542-546 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 546 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 5 |
| container_start_page | 542 |
| container_title | Spine (Philadelphia, Pa. 1976) |
| container_volume | 30 |
| creator | HAGEN, Kare B JAMTVEDT, Gro HILDE, Gunvor WINNEM, Michael F |
| description | A systematic review within the Cochrane Collaboration Back Review Group.
To report the main results from the updated version of the Cochrane Review on bed rest for low back pain.
There has been a growing amount of evidence showing that bed rest is not beneficial for people with low back pain. However, existing systematic reviews are unclear regarding the effects of bed rest for different types of low back pain.
All randomized studies available in systematic searches up to March 2003 were included. Two reviewers independently selected trials for inclusion assessed the validity of included trials and extracted data. Investigators were contacted to obtain missing information.
Two new trials comparing advice to rest in bed with advice to stay active were included. There is high quality evidence that people with acute low back pain who are advised to rest in bed have a little more pain (standardized mean difference 0.22, 95% confidence interval: 0.02-0.41) and a little less functional recovery (standardized mean difference 0.29, 95% confidence interval: 0.05-0.45) than those advised to stay active. For patients with sciatica, there is moderate quality evidence of little or no difference in pain (standardized mean difference -0.03, 95% confidence interval: -0.24-0.18) or functional status (standardized mean difference 0.19, 95% confidence interval: -0.02-0.41) between bed rest and staying active.
For people with acute low back pain, advice to rest in bed is less effective than advice to stay active. For patients with sciatica, there is little or no difference between advice to rest in bed and advice to stay active. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1097/01.brs.0000154625.02586.95 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_67475797</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>67475797</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c442t-97b0a6c83eddb695ed51c3fbd192fa22a464ea4217fdca7bccf84b8a66e69d1b3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpFkNtKAzEQhoMoWquvIEHQu12TbI7eiXgCwZt6HSYnXN12a9Iqvr3RFjo3A8M3Mz8fQueUtJQYdUVo63JpSS0quGSiJUxo2RqxhyZUMN1QKsw-mpBOsobxTh6h41LeKy87ag7RERWq00qrCbqfvUW8XgZYxYD96N8yLCLO8auP33hM2NVxjmWF05jxMH5jB_4DL6FfYFgEXHwPq97DCTpIMJR4uu1T9Hp_N7t9bJ5fHp5ub54bzzlbNUY5AtLrLobgpBExCOq75AI1LAFjwCWPwBlVKXhQzvukudMgZZQmUNdN0eXm7jKPn-uay8774uMw1NTjulipuBLKqApeb0Cfx1JyTHaZ-znkH0uJ_bNoCbXVot1ZtP8WrRF1-Wz7Ze3mMexWt9oqcLEFoHgYUpXm-7LjpGRKa9n9AvyofBU</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>67475797</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>The updated cochrane review of bed rest for low back pain and sciatica</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Journals@Ovid Complete</source><creator>HAGEN, Kare B ; JAMTVEDT, Gro ; HILDE, Gunvor ; WINNEM, Michael F</creator><creatorcontrib>HAGEN, Kare B ; JAMTVEDT, Gro ; HILDE, Gunvor ; WINNEM, Michael F</creatorcontrib><description>A systematic review within the Cochrane Collaboration Back Review Group.
To report the main results from the updated version of the Cochrane Review on bed rest for low back pain.
There has been a growing amount of evidence showing that bed rest is not beneficial for people with low back pain. However, existing systematic reviews are unclear regarding the effects of bed rest for different types of low back pain.
All randomized studies available in systematic searches up to March 2003 were included. Two reviewers independently selected trials for inclusion assessed the validity of included trials and extracted data. Investigators were contacted to obtain missing information.
Two new trials comparing advice to rest in bed with advice to stay active were included. There is high quality evidence that people with acute low back pain who are advised to rest in bed have a little more pain (standardized mean difference 0.22, 95% confidence interval: 0.02-0.41) and a little less functional recovery (standardized mean difference 0.29, 95% confidence interval: 0.05-0.45) than those advised to stay active. For patients with sciatica, there is moderate quality evidence of little or no difference in pain (standardized mean difference -0.03, 95% confidence interval: -0.24-0.18) or functional status (standardized mean difference 0.19, 95% confidence interval: -0.02-0.41) between bed rest and staying active.
For people with acute low back pain, advice to rest in bed is less effective than advice to stay active. For patients with sciatica, there is little or no difference between advice to rest in bed and advice to stay active.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0362-2436</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1528-1159</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1097/01.brs.0000154625.02586.95</identifier><identifier>PMID: 15738787</identifier><identifier>CODEN: SPINDD</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott</publisher><subject>Adolescent ; Adult ; Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; Bed Rest - statistics & numerical data ; Biological and medical sciences ; Cerebrospinal fluid. Meninges. Spinal cord ; Female ; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology ; Humans ; Low Back Pain - epidemiology ; Low Back Pain - therapy ; Male ; Medical sciences ; Middle Aged ; Nervous system (semeiology, syndromes) ; Neurology ; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic - statistics & numerical data ; Sciatica - epidemiology ; Sciatica - therapy ; Somesthesis and somesthetic pathways (proprioception, exteroception, nociception); interoception; electrolocation. Sensory receptors ; Tumors of the nervous system. Phacomatoses ; Vertebrates: nervous system and sense organs</subject><ispartof>Spine (Philadelphia, Pa. 1976), 2005-03, Vol.30 (5), p.542-546</ispartof><rights>2005 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c442t-97b0a6c83eddb695ed51c3fbd192fa22a464ea4217fdca7bccf84b8a66e69d1b3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c442t-97b0a6c83eddb695ed51c3fbd192fa22a464ea4217fdca7bccf84b8a66e69d1b3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=16627886$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15738787$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>HAGEN, Kare B</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>JAMTVEDT, Gro</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>HILDE, Gunvor</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>WINNEM, Michael F</creatorcontrib><title>The updated cochrane review of bed rest for low back pain and sciatica</title><title>Spine (Philadelphia, Pa. 1976)</title><addtitle>Spine (Phila Pa 1976)</addtitle><description>A systematic review within the Cochrane Collaboration Back Review Group.
To report the main results from the updated version of the Cochrane Review on bed rest for low back pain.
There has been a growing amount of evidence showing that bed rest is not beneficial for people with low back pain. However, existing systematic reviews are unclear regarding the effects of bed rest for different types of low back pain.
All randomized studies available in systematic searches up to March 2003 were included. Two reviewers independently selected trials for inclusion assessed the validity of included trials and extracted data. Investigators were contacted to obtain missing information.
Two new trials comparing advice to rest in bed with advice to stay active were included. There is high quality evidence that people with acute low back pain who are advised to rest in bed have a little more pain (standardized mean difference 0.22, 95% confidence interval: 0.02-0.41) and a little less functional recovery (standardized mean difference 0.29, 95% confidence interval: 0.05-0.45) than those advised to stay active. For patients with sciatica, there is moderate quality evidence of little or no difference in pain (standardized mean difference -0.03, 95% confidence interval: -0.24-0.18) or functional status (standardized mean difference 0.19, 95% confidence interval: -0.02-0.41) between bed rest and staying active.
For people with acute low back pain, advice to rest in bed is less effective than advice to stay active. For patients with sciatica, there is little or no difference between advice to rest in bed and advice to stay active.</description><subject>Adolescent</subject><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Aged, 80 and over</subject><subject>Bed Rest - statistics & numerical data</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Cerebrospinal fluid. Meninges. Spinal cord</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Low Back Pain - epidemiology</subject><subject>Low Back Pain - therapy</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Nervous system (semeiology, syndromes)</subject><subject>Neurology</subject><subject>Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic - statistics & numerical data</subject><subject>Sciatica - epidemiology</subject><subject>Sciatica - therapy</subject><subject>Somesthesis and somesthetic pathways (proprioception, exteroception, nociception); interoception; electrolocation. Sensory receptors</subject><subject>Tumors of the nervous system. Phacomatoses</subject><subject>Vertebrates: nervous system and sense organs</subject><issn>0362-2436</issn><issn>1528-1159</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2005</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNpFkNtKAzEQhoMoWquvIEHQu12TbI7eiXgCwZt6HSYnXN12a9Iqvr3RFjo3A8M3Mz8fQueUtJQYdUVo63JpSS0quGSiJUxo2RqxhyZUMN1QKsw-mpBOsobxTh6h41LeKy87ag7RERWq00qrCbqfvUW8XgZYxYD96N8yLCLO8auP33hM2NVxjmWF05jxMH5jB_4DL6FfYFgEXHwPq97DCTpIMJR4uu1T9Hp_N7t9bJ5fHp5ub54bzzlbNUY5AtLrLobgpBExCOq75AI1LAFjwCWPwBlVKXhQzvukudMgZZQmUNdN0eXm7jKPn-uay8774uMw1NTjulipuBLKqApeb0Cfx1JyTHaZ-znkH0uJ_bNoCbXVot1ZtP8WrRF1-Wz7Ze3mMexWt9oqcLEFoHgYUpXm-7LjpGRKa9n9AvyofBU</recordid><startdate>20050301</startdate><enddate>20050301</enddate><creator>HAGEN, Kare B</creator><creator>JAMTVEDT, Gro</creator><creator>HILDE, Gunvor</creator><creator>WINNEM, Michael F</creator><general>Lippincott</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20050301</creationdate><title>The updated cochrane review of bed rest for low back pain and sciatica</title><author>HAGEN, Kare B ; JAMTVEDT, Gro ; HILDE, Gunvor ; WINNEM, Michael F</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c442t-97b0a6c83eddb695ed51c3fbd192fa22a464ea4217fdca7bccf84b8a66e69d1b3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2005</creationdate><topic>Adolescent</topic><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Aged, 80 and over</topic><topic>Bed Rest - statistics & numerical data</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Cerebrospinal fluid. Meninges. Spinal cord</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Low Back Pain - epidemiology</topic><topic>Low Back Pain - therapy</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Nervous system (semeiology, syndromes)</topic><topic>Neurology</topic><topic>Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic - statistics & numerical data</topic><topic>Sciatica - epidemiology</topic><topic>Sciatica - therapy</topic><topic>Somesthesis and somesthetic pathways (proprioception, exteroception, nociception); interoception; electrolocation. Sensory receptors</topic><topic>Tumors of the nervous system. Phacomatoses</topic><topic>Vertebrates: nervous system and sense organs</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>HAGEN, Kare B</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>JAMTVEDT, Gro</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>HILDE, Gunvor</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>WINNEM, Michael F</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Spine (Philadelphia, Pa. 1976)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>HAGEN, Kare B</au><au>JAMTVEDT, Gro</au><au>HILDE, Gunvor</au><au>WINNEM, Michael F</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The updated cochrane review of bed rest for low back pain and sciatica</atitle><jtitle>Spine (Philadelphia, Pa. 1976)</jtitle><addtitle>Spine (Phila Pa 1976)</addtitle><date>2005-03-01</date><risdate>2005</risdate><volume>30</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>542</spage><epage>546</epage><pages>542-546</pages><issn>0362-2436</issn><eissn>1528-1159</eissn><coden>SPINDD</coden><abstract>A systematic review within the Cochrane Collaboration Back Review Group.
To report the main results from the updated version of the Cochrane Review on bed rest for low back pain.
There has been a growing amount of evidence showing that bed rest is not beneficial for people with low back pain. However, existing systematic reviews are unclear regarding the effects of bed rest for different types of low back pain.
All randomized studies available in systematic searches up to March 2003 were included. Two reviewers independently selected trials for inclusion assessed the validity of included trials and extracted data. Investigators were contacted to obtain missing information.
Two new trials comparing advice to rest in bed with advice to stay active were included. There is high quality evidence that people with acute low back pain who are advised to rest in bed have a little more pain (standardized mean difference 0.22, 95% confidence interval: 0.02-0.41) and a little less functional recovery (standardized mean difference 0.29, 95% confidence interval: 0.05-0.45) than those advised to stay active. For patients with sciatica, there is moderate quality evidence of little or no difference in pain (standardized mean difference -0.03, 95% confidence interval: -0.24-0.18) or functional status (standardized mean difference 0.19, 95% confidence interval: -0.02-0.41) between bed rest and staying active.
For people with acute low back pain, advice to rest in bed is less effective than advice to stay active. For patients with sciatica, there is little or no difference between advice to rest in bed and advice to stay active.</abstract><cop>Philadelphia, PA</cop><cop>Hagerstown, MD</cop><pub>Lippincott</pub><pmid>15738787</pmid><doi>10.1097/01.brs.0000154625.02586.95</doi><tpages>5</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0362-2436 |
| ispartof | Spine (Philadelphia, Pa. 1976), 2005-03, Vol.30 (5), p.542-546 |
| issn | 0362-2436 1528-1159 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_67475797 |
| source | MEDLINE; Journals@Ovid Complete |
| subjects | Adolescent Adult Aged Aged, 80 and over Bed Rest - statistics & numerical data Biological and medical sciences Cerebrospinal fluid. Meninges. Spinal cord Female Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology Humans Low Back Pain - epidemiology Low Back Pain - therapy Male Medical sciences Middle Aged Nervous system (semeiology, syndromes) Neurology Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic - statistics & numerical data Sciatica - epidemiology Sciatica - therapy Somesthesis and somesthetic pathways (proprioception, exteroception, nociception) interoception electrolocation. Sensory receptors Tumors of the nervous system. Phacomatoses Vertebrates: nervous system and sense organs |
| title | The updated cochrane review of bed rest for low back pain and sciatica |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-24T06%3A55%3A00IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20updated%20cochrane%20review%20of%20bed%20rest%20for%20low%20back%20pain%20and%20sciatica&rft.jtitle=Spine%20(Philadelphia,%20Pa.%201976)&rft.au=HAGEN,%20Kare%20B&rft.date=2005-03-01&rft.volume=30&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=542&rft.epage=546&rft.pages=542-546&rft.issn=0362-2436&rft.eissn=1528-1159&rft.coden=SPINDD&rft_id=info:doi/10.1097/01.brs.0000154625.02586.95&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E67475797%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=67475797&rft_id=info:pmid/15738787&rfr_iscdi=true |