Use the Back button in your browser to see the other results of your search or to select another record.
Analgesic effectiveness of subcutaneous carbon-dioxide insufflations as an adjunct treatment in patients with non-specific neck or low back pain: a pragmatic, open, randomized controlled trial |
Brockow T, Dillner A, Franke A, Resch KL |
Complementary Therapies in Medicine 2001 Jun;9(2):68-76 |
clinical trial |
7/10 [Eligibility criteria: Yes; Random allocation: Yes; Concealed allocation: Yes; Baseline comparability: Yes; Blind subjects: No; Blind therapists: No; Blind assessors: No; Adequate follow-up: Yes; Intention-to-treat analysis: Yes; Between-group comparisons: Yes; Point estimates and variability: Yes. Note: Eligibility criteria item does not contribute to total score] *This score has been confirmed* |
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the analgesic effectiveness of subcutaneous carbon-dioxide insufflations in addition to standard physical treatment in patients with non-specific neck or low back pain. DESIGN: A pragmatic, randomized controlled trial. SETTING: Rehabilitation hospital inpatients. INTERVENTIONS: Patients received either subcutaneous carbon-dioxide insufflations (10 treatments) and standard physical treatment or standard physical treatment only. OUTCOME MEASURES: Affective pain perception (42-point scale), sensory pain perception (30-point scale), pain intensity (100 mm visual analogue scale). RESULTS: Between-groups differences were -2.2 (95% CI -5.2 to +0.9) (affective pain perception), -1.2 (-3.0 to +0.7) (sensory pain perception), and -6.5 (-14 to +1.0) (pain intensity) respectively in favour of subcutaneous carbon-dioxide insufflations. CONCLUSIONS: Subcutaneous carbon-dioxide insufflations do not seem to be a worthwhile adjunct in the given setting of inpatient rehabilitation. Trials in a monotherapeutic setting, which aim more at the efficacy of subcutaneous carbon-dioxide insufflations, might help to solve this issue.
|