Multidisciplinary integrative care versus chiropractic care for low back pain: a randomized clinical trial

被引:6
|
作者
Bronfort, Gert [1 ]
Maiers, Michele [2 ]
Schulz, Craig [1 ]
Leininger, Brent [1 ]
Westrom, Kristine [1 ]
Angstman, Greg [3 ]
Evans, Roni [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Minnesota, Mayo Bldg C504,420 Delaware St SE, Minneapolis, MN 55455 USA
[2] Northwestern Hlth Sci Univ, 2501 W 84th St, Bloomington, MN 55431 USA
[3] St Elizabeths Med Ctr Wabasha, 1000 1st Dr NW, Austin, MN USA
基金
美国国家卫生研究院;
关键词
Back pain; Multidisciplinary; Integrative medicine; Chiropractic; Clinical trial; QUALITY-OF-LIFE; SPINAL MANIPULATION; FUNCTIONAL STATUS; BEHAVIOR-CHANGE; QUESTIONNAIRE; MANAGEMENT; EXERCISE; PROGRAM; NECK; FEAR;
D O I
10.1186/s12998-022-00419-3
中图分类号
R49 [康复医学];
学科分类号
100215 ;
摘要
Background Low back pain (LBP) is influenced by interrelated biological, psychological, and social factors, however current back pain management is largely dominated by one-size fits all unimodal treatments. Team based models with multiple provider types from complementary professional disciplines is one way of integrating therapies to address patients' needs more comprehensively. Methods This parallel group randomized clinical trial conducted from May 2007 to August 2010 aimed to evaluate the relative clinical effectiveness of 12 weeks of monodisciplinary chiropractic care (CC), versus multidisciplinary integrative care (IC), for adults with sub-acute and chronic LBP. The primary outcome was pain intensity and secondary outcomes were disability, improvement, medication use, quality of life, satisfaction, frequency of symptoms, missed work or reduced activities days, fear avoidance beliefs, self-efficacy, pain coping strategies and kinesiophobia measured at baseline and 4, 12, 26 and 52 weeks. Linear mixed models were used to analyze outcomes. Results 201 participants were enrolled. The largest reductions in pain intensity occurred at the end of treatment and were 43% for CC and 47% for IC. The primary analysis found IC to be significantly superior to CC over the 1-year period (P = 0.02). The long-term profile for pain intensity which included data from weeks 4 through 52, showed a significant advantage of 0.5 for IC over CC (95% CI 0.1 to 0.9; P = 0.02; 0 to 10 scale). The short-term profile (weeks 4 to 12) favored IC by 0.4, but was not statistically significant (95% CI - 0.02 to 0.9; P = 0.06). There was also a significant advantage over the long term for IC in some secondary measures (disability, improvement, satisfaction and low back symptom frequency), but not for others (medication use, quality of life, leg symptom frequency, fear avoidance beliefs, self-efficacy, active pain coping, and kinesiophobia). Importantly, no serious adverse events resulted from either of the interventions. Conclusions Participants in the IC group tended to have better outcomes than the CC group, however the magnitude of the group differences was relatively small. Given the resources required to successfully implement multidisciplinary integrative care teams, they may not be worthwhile, compared to monodisciplinary approaches like chiropractic care, for treating LBP. Trial registration NCT00567333.
引用
收藏
页数:17
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Randomized-controlled trial assessing a digital care program versus conventional physiotherapy for chronic low back pain
    Di Cui
    Dora Janela
    Fabíola Costa
    Maria Molinos
    Anabela C. Areias
    Robert G. Moulder
    Justin K. Scheer
    Virgílio Bento
    Steven P. Cohen
    Vijay Yanamadala
    Fernando Dias Correia
    npj Digital Medicine, 6
  • [42] Cost-effectiveness of acupuncture versus standard care for pelvic and low back pain in pregnancy: A randomized controlled trial
    Nicolian, Stephanie
    Butel, Thibault
    Gambotti, Laetitia
    Durand, Manon
    Filipovic-Pierucci, Antoine
    Mallet, Alain
    Kone, Mamadou
    Durand-Zaleski, Isabelle
    Dommergues, Marc
    PLOS ONE, 2019, 14 (04):
  • [43] A pilot study for a randomized clinical trial assessing chiropractic care, medical care, and self-care education for acute and subacute neck pain patients
    Evans, R
    Bronfort, G
    Bittell, S
    Anderson, AV
    JOURNAL OF MANIPULATIVE AND PHYSIOLOGICAL THERAPEUTICS, 2003, 26 (07) : 403 - 411
  • [44] OA11.02. A model of integrative care for low back pain
    D Eisenberg
    J Buring
    A Hrbek
    R Davis
    M Connelly
    D Cherkin
    D Levy
    M Cunningham
    B O'Connor
    D Post
    BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine, 12 (Suppl 1):
  • [45] A Structured Protocol of Evidence-Based Conservative Care Compared With Usual Care for Acute Nonspecific Low Back Pain: A Randomized Clinical Trial
    Parkin-Smith, Gregory F.
    Norman, Ian J.
    Briggs, Emma
    Angier, Elizabeth
    Wood, Timothy G.
    Brantingham, James W.
    ARCHIVES OF PHYSICAL MEDICINE AND REHABILITATION, 2012, 93 (01): : 11 - 20
  • [47] EFFECTIVENESS OF CHIROPRACTIC AND PHYSIOTHERAPY IN THE TREATMENT OF LOW-BACK-PAIN - A CRITICAL DISCUSSION OF THE BRITISH RANDOMIZED CLINICAL-TRIAL
    ASSENDELFT, WJJ
    BOUTER, LM
    KESSELS, AGH
    JOURNAL OF MANIPULATIVE AND PHYSIOLOGICAL THERAPEUTICS, 1991, 14 (05) : 281 - 286
  • [48] Assessment of chiropractic care on strength, balance, and endurance in active-duty US military personnel with low back pain: a protocol for a randomized controlled trial
    Vining, Robert
    Minkalis, Amy
    Long, Cynthia R.
    Corber, Lance
    Franklin, Crystal
    Gudavalli, M. Ram
    Xia, Ting
    Goertz, Christine M.
    TRIALS, 2018, 19
  • [49] Comparison of Spinal Manipulation Methods and Usual Medical Care for Acute and Subacute Low Back Pain A Randomized Clinical Trial
    Schneider, Michael
    Haas, Mitchell
    Glick, Ronald
    Stevans, Joel
    Landsittel, Doug
    SPINE, 2015, 40 (04) : 209 - 217
  • [50] Cost-effectiveness of medical and chiropractic care for acute and chronic low back pain
    Haas, M
    Sharma, R
    Stano, M
    JOURNAL OF MANIPULATIVE AND PHYSIOLOGICAL THERAPEUTICS, 2005, 28 (08) : 555 - 563