MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Efficacy of intradermal administration of diclofenac for the treatment of nonspecific chronic low back pain: results from a retrospective observational study

2019· article· en· W2963278157 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Gianpaolo Ronconi, Giorgio Ferriero, Cristina Nigito, Calogero Foti, Giulio Maccauro, Paola Emilia Ferrara

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPain Management and Opioid Use
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDiclofenacObservational studyRetrospective cohort studyChronic painAdministration (probate law)AnesthesiaPain managementPhysical therapySurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Intradermal administration of analgesic drugs with mesotherapy is effective for the local treatment of musculoskeletal pain. Few studies analyzed the effects of different drugs administrated with this technique. AIM: The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of diclofenac versus lysine acetylsalicylate-based mesotherapy in relieving pain (primary outcome), and disability (secondary outcome) in patients with nonspecific chronic low back pain. DESIGN: Retrospective observational study. SETTING: Outpatient rehabilitation medicine center. POPULATION: Records of 101 patients with nonspecific chronic low back pain. METHODS: Data were extracted from the outpatients records of patients affected by nonspecific chronic low back pain since 12 weeks before, treated with 5 sessions of mesotherapy with diclofenac mixtures (group A) or aspirin-lysine acetylsalicylate mixture (group B). Assessments recorded were taken before the first treatment (T0), at the end of the 5-week treatment (T1), and at 4 (T2) and 12 weeks (T3) of follow-up after the last treatment, using a pain visual analogue scale (VAS) primary outcome, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) secondary outcome, and the Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ) Comparisons within and between groups were performed using the t-test, the χ2 test, and analysis of variance (ANOVA) models, as appropriate. RESULTS: Records from 101 patients consecutively were analyzed, 51 in group A (mean age and standard deviation [SD]=62.8±10.7; F/M=33/18) and 50 in group B (mean age±SD=64.1±15.8; F/M=30/20). At baseline VAS, SF-MPQ, ODI scores were respectively 7.6±1.3, 22.49±9.96, 44.80±15.55 (mean and SD) in group A; VAS, SF-MPQ, ODI scores were respectively 6.7±1.6, 18.66±9.65, 39.04±16.06 (mean and SD) in group B. Mean differences between group A and group B in the changes of scores from baseline (T0) to end of study (T3) were -1.3 (VAS), -5.81 (SF-MPQ) and -17.05 (ODI). Mesotherapy induced significant reductions in pain severity and disability in both groups with better results in diclofenac-based treatment. CONCLUSIONS: This retrospective pilot study suggests the efficacy and safety of diclofenac mesotherapy for relieving pain and disability in patients affected by chronic nonspecific low back pain in a convenient sample but further studies will confirm these results. CLINICAL REHABILITATION IMPACT: Diclofenac mesotherapy appears to be a viable treatment. to reduce pain and improve function in patients affected by chronic moderate-to-severe nonspecific low back pain.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.480
Threshold uncertainty score0.232

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.035
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.264 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Physical and Rehabilitation MedicineSame topicPain Management and Opioid UseFrench-language works237,207