Measuring the contribution of pharmacological treatment to advice to stay active in patients with subacute low-back pain: a randomised controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: In clinical guidelines for acute and subacute low-back pain, pharmacological treatment is recommended for short-term symptomatic relief. The objective was to study the effect of the guidelines' advise to remain active, alone and with the addition of the drug adenosine tri-phosphate (ATP), in patients with subacute low-back pain. METHODS: A drug-guidelines effectiveness trial was undertaken simultaneously to an experimental drug efficacy placebo controlled trial in subacute (4-12 weeks) non-specific low-back pain patients. The 132 participating primary care physicians across France were randomised to participate to either trial. In the drug-guidelines trial, all physicians received a quick consultation card containing the key elements of the clinical guidelines and a brochure that gave their patients practical tips to remain active. Patients were then randomised to receive Atepadene, containing 90 mg of ATP by mouth daily for 30 days (guidelines plus ATP group), or nothing beside the rescue drug that was made available to all patients (guidelines alone group). The principal outcome was functional improvement on the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RDQ) at 90 days. RESULTS: In the drug-guidelines effectiveness trial, 157 patients were randomised. The rate of improvement in the RDQ over the 90 days of follow-up was superior in the group guidelines plus ATP (8.3 points, 95% confidence interval (CI): 7.3-9.3) than in the group guidelines alone (6.5 points, 95%CI: 5.3-7.7) (p = 0.02). In terms of probability of improving between two to five points on the RDQ at 90 days this difference translated in a 2 to 13 times higher probability compared to the group guidelines alone (odds ratios ranging from 2.1, 95%CI: 0.9-5.0 to 12.9, 95%CI: 1.6-103.4). Patients in the group guidelines plus ATP were also three times less likely to report a condition that had worsened or remained unimproved at 90 days (p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: This drug-guidelines effectiveness trial showed a modest advantage of combined specific pharmacologic and non-pharmacological treatments on absolute improvement on the RDQ. A threefold reduction in the risk of chronicity was observed, an important goal in low-back pain guidelines.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".