Complementary and alternative therapies for low back pain

The support for the principles of evidence-based medicine has increased within the field of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM). The objective of this chapter is to determine the effectiveness of CAM therapies compared to placebo, no intervention, or other interventions for acute/subacute a...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Best practice & research. Clinical rheumatology 2005-08, Vol.19 (4), p.639-654
Hauptverfasser: van Tulder, Maurits W., Furlan, Andrea D., Gagnier, Joel J.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 654
container_issue 4
container_start_page 639
container_title Best practice & research. Clinical rheumatology
container_volume 19
creator van Tulder, Maurits W.
Furlan, Andrea D.
Gagnier, Joel J.
description The support for the principles of evidence-based medicine has increased within the field of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM). The objective of this chapter is to determine the effectiveness of CAM therapies compared to placebo, no intervention, or other interventions for acute/subacute and chronic non-specific low back pain (LBP). Results from Cochrane reviews on acupuncture, botanical medicine, massage, neuroreflexotherapy, and spinal manipulation have been used. The results showed that acupuncture is more effective than no treatment or sham treatment for chronic LBP but that there are no differences in effectiveness compared with other conventional therapies. Specific botanical medicines can be effective for acute episodes of chronic non-specific LBP in terms of short-term improvement in pain and functional status; long-term efficacy was not assessed. Massage seems more beneficial than sham treatment for chronic non-specific LBP but effectiveness compared with other conventional therapies is inconclusive. Neuroreflexotherapy appears to be more effective than sham treatment or standard care for chronic non-specific LBP. Spinal manipulation was more effective than sham manipulation or ineffective therapies, and equally effective as other conventional therapies. In summary, the results on CAM therapies for (acute episodes of) chronic LBP are promising but more evidence on the relative cost-effectiveness compared to conventional treatments is needed.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.berh.2005.03.006
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_67919800</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S152169420500029X</els_id><sourcerecordid>67919800</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c380t-8cb8cd9ada10e2f67a55565a2b2c9602f6190b8b8389ebbd8176ce4d3a39b82a3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kEtLAzEUhYMotlb_gAuZlbsZb5LOTAJupPiCghtdhzzu0NR5mUwr_ntnaMGdq3u4nHPgfIRcU8go0OJumxkMm4wB5BnwDKA4IXOac5bSsoTTSTOaFnLJZuQixi0A55Itz8mM5nIpS0HnRK66pq-xwXbQ4SfRrUt0PWBo9eD3mAwbDLr3GJOqC0ndfSdG28-k1769JGeVriNeHe-CfDw9vq9e0vXb8-vqYZ1aLmBIhTXCOqmdpoCsKkqd53mRa2aYlQWMHyrBCCO4kGiME7QsLC4d11wawTRfkNtDbx-6rx3GQTU-Wqxr3WK3i6ooJZVi3LYg7GC0oYsxYKX64JtxlaKgJmBqqyZgagKmgKsR2Bi6ObbvTIPuL3IkNBruDwYcN-49BhWtx9ai8wHtoFzn_-v_Ba-GfC8</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>67919800</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Complementary and alternative therapies for low back pain</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete</source><creator>van Tulder, Maurits W. ; Furlan, Andrea D. ; Gagnier, Joel J.</creator><creatorcontrib>van Tulder, Maurits W. ; Furlan, Andrea D. ; Gagnier, Joel J.</creatorcontrib><description>The support for the principles of evidence-based medicine has increased within the field of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM). The objective of this chapter is to determine the effectiveness of CAM therapies compared to placebo, no intervention, or other interventions for acute/subacute and chronic non-specific low back pain (LBP). Results from Cochrane reviews on acupuncture, botanical medicine, massage, neuroreflexotherapy, and spinal manipulation have been used. The results showed that acupuncture is more effective than no treatment or sham treatment for chronic LBP but that there are no differences in effectiveness compared with other conventional therapies. Specific botanical medicines can be effective for acute episodes of chronic non-specific LBP in terms of short-term improvement in pain and functional status; long-term efficacy was not assessed. Massage seems more beneficial than sham treatment for chronic non-specific LBP but effectiveness compared with other conventional therapies is inconclusive. Neuroreflexotherapy appears to be more effective than sham treatment or standard care for chronic non-specific LBP. Spinal manipulation was more effective than sham manipulation or ineffective therapies, and equally effective as other conventional therapies. In summary, the results on CAM therapies for (acute episodes of) chronic LBP are promising but more evidence on the relative cost-effectiveness compared to conventional treatments is needed.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1521-6942</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1532-1770</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.berh.2005.03.006</identifier><identifier>PMID: 15949781</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Netherlands: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>Clinical Trials as Topic ; Complementary Therapies - economics ; complementary therapy ; Evidence-Based Medicine ; Humans ; low back pain ; Low Back Pain - physiopathology ; Low Back Pain - rehabilitation ; primary care ; Primary Health Care - methods ; systematic reviews ; Treatment Outcome</subject><ispartof>Best practice &amp; research. Clinical rheumatology, 2005-08, Vol.19 (4), p.639-654</ispartof><rights>2005 Elsevier Ltd</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c380t-8cb8cd9ada10e2f67a55565a2b2c9602f6190b8b8389ebbd8176ce4d3a39b82a3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c380t-8cb8cd9ada10e2f67a55565a2b2c9602f6190b8b8389ebbd8176ce4d3a39b82a3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S152169420500029X$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3537,27901,27902,65306</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15949781$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>van Tulder, Maurits W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Furlan, Andrea D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gagnier, Joel J.</creatorcontrib><title>Complementary and alternative therapies for low back pain</title><title>Best practice &amp; research. Clinical rheumatology</title><addtitle>Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol</addtitle><description>The support for the principles of evidence-based medicine has increased within the field of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM). The objective of this chapter is to determine the effectiveness of CAM therapies compared to placebo, no intervention, or other interventions for acute/subacute and chronic non-specific low back pain (LBP). Results from Cochrane reviews on acupuncture, botanical medicine, massage, neuroreflexotherapy, and spinal manipulation have been used. The results showed that acupuncture is more effective than no treatment or sham treatment for chronic LBP but that there are no differences in effectiveness compared with other conventional therapies. Specific botanical medicines can be effective for acute episodes of chronic non-specific LBP in terms of short-term improvement in pain and functional status; long-term efficacy was not assessed. Massage seems more beneficial than sham treatment for chronic non-specific LBP but effectiveness compared with other conventional therapies is inconclusive. Neuroreflexotherapy appears to be more effective than sham treatment or standard care for chronic non-specific LBP. Spinal manipulation was more effective than sham manipulation or ineffective therapies, and equally effective as other conventional therapies. In summary, the results on CAM therapies for (acute episodes of) chronic LBP are promising but more evidence on the relative cost-effectiveness compared to conventional treatments is needed.</description><subject>Clinical Trials as Topic</subject><subject>Complementary Therapies - economics</subject><subject>complementary therapy</subject><subject>Evidence-Based Medicine</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>low back pain</subject><subject>Low Back Pain - physiopathology</subject><subject>Low Back Pain - rehabilitation</subject><subject>primary care</subject><subject>Primary Health Care - methods</subject><subject>systematic reviews</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><issn>1521-6942</issn><issn>1532-1770</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2005</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kEtLAzEUhYMotlb_gAuZlbsZb5LOTAJupPiCghtdhzzu0NR5mUwr_ntnaMGdq3u4nHPgfIRcU8go0OJumxkMm4wB5BnwDKA4IXOac5bSsoTTSTOaFnLJZuQixi0A55Itz8mM5nIpS0HnRK66pq-xwXbQ4SfRrUt0PWBo9eD3mAwbDLr3GJOqC0ndfSdG28-k1769JGeVriNeHe-CfDw9vq9e0vXb8-vqYZ1aLmBIhTXCOqmdpoCsKkqd53mRa2aYlQWMHyrBCCO4kGiME7QsLC4d11wawTRfkNtDbx-6rx3GQTU-Wqxr3WK3i6ooJZVi3LYg7GC0oYsxYKX64JtxlaKgJmBqqyZgagKmgKsR2Bi6ObbvTIPuL3IkNBruDwYcN-49BhWtx9ai8wHtoFzn_-v_Ba-GfC8</recordid><startdate>20050801</startdate><enddate>20050801</enddate><creator>van Tulder, Maurits W.</creator><creator>Furlan, Andrea D.</creator><creator>Gagnier, Joel J.</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><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>20050801</creationdate><title>Complementary and alternative therapies for low back pain</title><author>van Tulder, Maurits W. ; Furlan, Andrea D. ; Gagnier, Joel J.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c380t-8cb8cd9ada10e2f67a55565a2b2c9602f6190b8b8389ebbd8176ce4d3a39b82a3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2005</creationdate><topic>Clinical Trials as Topic</topic><topic>Complementary Therapies - economics</topic><topic>complementary therapy</topic><topic>Evidence-Based Medicine</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>low back pain</topic><topic>Low Back Pain - physiopathology</topic><topic>Low Back Pain - rehabilitation</topic><topic>primary care</topic><topic>Primary Health Care - methods</topic><topic>systematic reviews</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>van Tulder, Maurits W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Furlan, Andrea D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gagnier, Joel J.</creatorcontrib><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>Best practice &amp; research. Clinical rheumatology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>van Tulder, Maurits W.</au><au>Furlan, Andrea D.</au><au>Gagnier, Joel J.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Complementary and alternative therapies for low back pain</atitle><jtitle>Best practice &amp; research. Clinical rheumatology</jtitle><addtitle>Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol</addtitle><date>2005-08-01</date><risdate>2005</risdate><volume>19</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>639</spage><epage>654</epage><pages>639-654</pages><issn>1521-6942</issn><eissn>1532-1770</eissn><abstract>The support for the principles of evidence-based medicine has increased within the field of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM). The objective of this chapter is to determine the effectiveness of CAM therapies compared to placebo, no intervention, or other interventions for acute/subacute and chronic non-specific low back pain (LBP). Results from Cochrane reviews on acupuncture, botanical medicine, massage, neuroreflexotherapy, and spinal manipulation have been used. The results showed that acupuncture is more effective than no treatment or sham treatment for chronic LBP but that there are no differences in effectiveness compared with other conventional therapies. Specific botanical medicines can be effective for acute episodes of chronic non-specific LBP in terms of short-term improvement in pain and functional status; long-term efficacy was not assessed. Massage seems more beneficial than sham treatment for chronic non-specific LBP but effectiveness compared with other conventional therapies is inconclusive. Neuroreflexotherapy appears to be more effective than sham treatment or standard care for chronic non-specific LBP. Spinal manipulation was more effective than sham manipulation or ineffective therapies, and equally effective as other conventional therapies. In summary, the results on CAM therapies for (acute episodes of) chronic LBP are promising but more evidence on the relative cost-effectiveness compared to conventional treatments is needed.</abstract><cop>Netherlands</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><pmid>15949781</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.berh.2005.03.006</doi><tpages>16</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1521-6942
ispartof Best practice & research. Clinical rheumatology, 2005-08, Vol.19 (4), p.639-654
issn 1521-6942
1532-1770
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_67919800
source MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete
subjects Clinical Trials as Topic
Complementary Therapies - economics
complementary therapy
Evidence-Based Medicine
Humans
low back pain
Low Back Pain - physiopathology
Low Back Pain - rehabilitation
primary care
Primary Health Care - methods
systematic reviews
Treatment Outcome
title Complementary and alternative therapies for low back pain
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-05T18%3A16%3A46IST&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=Complementary%20and%20alternative%20therapies%20for%20low%20back%20pain&rft.jtitle=Best%20practice%20&%20research.%20Clinical%20rheumatology&rft.au=van%20Tulder,%20Maurits%20W.&rft.date=2005-08-01&rft.volume=19&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=639&rft.epage=654&rft.pages=639-654&rft.issn=1521-6942&rft.eissn=1532-1770&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.berh.2005.03.006&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E67919800%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=67919800&rft_id=info:pmid/15949781&rft_els_id=S152169420500029X&rfr_iscdi=true