A Review of the Evidence for the Effectiveness, Safety, and Cost of Acupuncture, Massage Therapy, and Spinal Manipulation for Back Pain
Top Cited Papers
- 3 June 2003
- journal article
- review article
- Published by American College of Physicians in Annals of Internal Medicine
- Vol. 138 (11) , 898-906
- https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-138-11-200306030-00011
Abstract
Few treatments for back pain are supported by strong scientific evidence. Conventional treatments, although widely used, have had limited success. Dissatisfied patients have, therefore, turned to complementary and alternative medical therapies and providers for care for back pain. To provide a rigorous and balanced summary of the best available evidence about the effectiveness, safety, and costs of the most popular complementary and alternative medical therapies used to treat back pain. MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register. Systematic reviews of randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) that were published since 1995 and that evaluated acupuncture, massage therapy, or spinal manipulation for nonspecific back pain and RCTs published since the reviews were conducted. Two authors independently extracted data from the reviews (including number of RCTs, type of back pain, quality assessment, and conclusions) and original articles (including type of pain, comparison treatments, sample size, outcomes, follow-up intervals, loss to follow-up, and authors' conclusions). Because the quality of the 20 RCTs that evaluated acupuncture was generally poor, the effectiveness of acupuncture for treating acute or chronic back pain is unclear. The three RCTs that evaluated massage reported that this therapy is effective for subacute and chronic back pain. A meta-regression analysis of the results of 26 RCTs evaluating spinal manipulation for acute and chronic back pain reported that spinal manipulation was superior to sham therapies and therapies judged to have no evidence of a benefit but was not superior to effective conventional treatments. Initial studies have found massage to be effective for persistent back pain. Spinal manipulation has small clinical benefits that are equivalent to those of other commonly used therapies. The effectiveness of acupuncture remains unclear. All of these treatments seem to be relatively safe. Preliminary evidence suggests that massage, but not acupuncture or spinal manipulation, may reduce the costs of care after an initial course of therapy.Keywords
This publication has 33 references indexed in Scilit:
- Conservative Treatment of Acute and Chronic Nonspecific Low-back Pain: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials of the Most Common InterventionsPublished by Springer Nature ,2013
- Patient characteristics and physicians' practice activities for patients with chronic low back pain: A practice-based study of primary care and chiropractic physiciansJournal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics, 2001
- Teasing apart quality and validity in systematic reviews: an example from acupuncture trials in chronic neck and back painPain, 2000
- Trends in alternative medicine use in the United States, 1990–1997: results of a follow-up national surveyComplementary Therapies in Medicine, 1999
- Chronic spinal pain syndromes: A clinical pilot trial comparing acupuncture, a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug, and spinal manipulationJournal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics, 1999
- Employer-Sponsored Health Insurance for Chiropractic ServicesMedical Care, 1998
- Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: Is blinding necessary?Controlled Clinical Trials, 1996
- Spinal Manipulation for Low-Back PainAnnals of Internal Medicine, 1992
- Spinal manipulation and mobilisation for back and neck pain: a blinded review.BMJ, 1991
- Survey of Pain in the United States: The Nuprin Pain ReportThe Clinical Journal of Pain, 1986